Yesterday, I engaged in a discussion that centered around Matthew 24 and whether or not the terminology of This generation was meant for a far distant future generation - or if Christ specifically referred to the generation of the Disciples themselves. This discussion took place at the private Facebook Group Mormon and Protestant Discussions.
Here is the conversation that unfolded at this private group. My response and the responses provided by those who engaged in discussing this particular topic. The perspective and position I hold is that Matthew 23-25, known as the Olivet Discourse, is a prophecy Christ made after pronouncing the woes and judgment to come upon the wicked generation of the Scribes, Pharisees and religious leaders.
Matthew 24 in Discussion
The original post and contributor for the discussion is Todd Giberson. He writes:
In Matthew 24 we have Jesus prophesying not only the destruction of Jerusalem but also giving signs of His Second Coming. In verse 34 Jesus is recorded as saying, "Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." In this context, what does Jesus mean by the phrase "this generation"?
My initial response to this was brief and to the point:
Generation of the Jews. People forget that Matthew 23 is where Christ pronounces final judgment and wrath upon Jerusalem and Israel. This came by way of destruction of the city and the temple as prophesied. Matthew 24 is a statement of His coming in Judgment against Israel.
Giberson made the following reply to my initial comment to his question:
At the beginning of the chapter Jesus is indeed telling his disciples about the coming destruction of Jerusalem, when one stone of the temple would not remain on another, but he is also answering their questions about the sign of Jesus's coming and the end of the world. Do you see this answered as well?
I provided the following answer his question - do you see this answered as well? - regarding the answer to the disciple's question about His coming:
The full pericope is Matthew 23-25. Matthew 24 is a continuation of what occurred in Matthew 23. Can't separate them from one another.
Giberson provided the following response:
Yet Jesus is addressing more than one topic.
My next response provided a break down and summation of what Matthew 23-24 revealed.
Brief Analysis and Summation of Matthew 23-24
Are you sure about that?
Matthew 23:1-12 - Christ warns his disciples, and those in the crowd regarding the hypocrisy of the religious leaders.
Matthew 23:13-36 - Christ pronounces 7 woes upon the present Scribes and Pharisees. Notice vv. 34-36:
"34 For this reason, behold, I am sending to you prophets and wise men and scribes. Some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will flog in your synagogues and will pursue from town to town, 35 so that upon you will come all the righteous blood shed on the earth from the blood of righteous Abel up to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 Truly I say to you; all these things will come upon this generation!"
Since he is speaking to the disciples, those within the crowd, and the scribes and pharisees that are among them - Christ says that he will send who out? The Disciples - the Apostles. He then declared that those Apostles and disciples will be persecuted, crucified, tortured, and their "righteous blood" shall be shed. What will happen then? Christ said that the people of that generation (First Century Jews) shall "all the righteous blood of Abel on down to the blood of Zechariah, son of Barachiah". That this wrath and judgment shall come up on that Generation.
Now, let us look at Matthew 24 shall we.
Matthew 24:1-3 - Jesus leaves the temple court and heads out toward the Mt. of Olives (hence is the reason Matthew 23-24 is known as the Olivet Discourse). The Disciples followed him - pointing out the buildings of the Temple. Christ then gives his prophetic revelation that the Temple will be destroyed. Now, bear in mind. Christ just pronounced 7 woes upon the First Century Jews, Scribes and Pharisees. He is going to hold them accountable for the righteous blood that was shed from Abel on down to their present time and generation. This includes the torture, flogging, and death of the Apostles that will soon follow.
Christ pointed out and stated that the temple of Jerusalem will be destroyed.
Matthew 24:3-8 Signs of the End of the Age The disciples asked Christ "When will these things happen?" What are those things that will happen? The Judgment to come upon the First Century Jews and the very destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem.
Take notice of these facts that Christ points out:
- increase in deception and false teaching This implies that Christ knew there was going to be an apostasy.
- Hear about wars and rumors of wars. Guess what war Christ is most likely referring too? The Roman Jewish War that started in 66 A.D. and ended in 73 AD.
- Nation will rise up against nation due to famine and natural disasters. Guess what occurred right around the first century? Yep, Rome entering into civil unrest, war, and the Jewish factions increasing with the Zealots, Scribes, and Pharisees.
However, Christ said that is not the end of the age yet.
- Matthew 24:9-14 Christ actually reiterates the persecution and death of the original Apostles (cf. Matthew 23:34). Not only the persecution of the original 12 - but Christ also claimed that they - the original 12 (along with Paul the Apostle) will proclaim the gospel unto all nations (of the first Century). However, guess what Christ also said that will occur prior to this? He again asserts that there is going to be an apostasy that will occur as a sign of the end of the age.
- Matthew 24:15-27 is the pronouncement of the Abomination of Desolation (which refers back to the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem of the First Century).
- Matthew 24:29-31 - Immediately following the tribulation of that Generation (the First Century Jews and Christians alike - Christ will come in Judgment and gather the elect - from where? Not from the earth. Take note of what v. 31 says: "And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect together from the four winds, from ONE END OF HEAVEN TO THE OTHER END OF IT." Does not say anything about people being raptured in some distant future. Christ clearly is referring to gathering those who are righteous and already have passed from mortality and into immortality - they will be gathered.
- Matthew 24:32-35 - Parable of the Fig tree. Guess what happened when the Roman Army came and laid siege against Jerusalem? Those who heard and understood the words of Christ fled the city without question. In fact, many of the Jewish and Gentile Christians who fled the city of Jerusalem, and most likely the land of Jerusalem - found refuge in Pella.
- Matthew 24:36-44 - Christ states he does not know the exact day that this will happen and warns the disciples to pay attention, be alert, and teach others to be alert and watchful for the signs of things to come in their generation. Not a future generation - THEIR AGE and GENERATOPN.
- Matthew 24:45-51 Christ summed up all that he said to that point with the parable of the faithful and unfaithful servant. A reminder of what is yet to come upon the Disciples Generation.
Now, if you want to attempt some serious mental gymnastics in fitting this into yet to be fulfilled prophecy - then you better utilize Deuteronomy 13 and Deuteronomy 18 and call Jesus Christ out as a liar and a deceiver. How come? Because Christ specifically stated what will happen in the generation of the Disciples of the first Century. This includes an apostasy and rising up of false teachings, Christ's and apostles.
Are you willing to go that far with your mental eisegesis gymnastics to conclude that Christ is a liar and a false prophet?
An Admin attempted to run interference of the discussion
One of the Administrators of the Facebook group felt compelled to jump into the conversation and attempted to point out some things she felt I missed, made claims of me making personal attacks in my response, and even going so far as to engage in gaslighting. Sherry Fraiser first stated the following:
In all of your comment, I cannot help but notice you made no mention of Matthew 24:21 where Jesus clearly describes the absolute worst of human history when He describes the Great Tribulation with the single sentence of: For then shall be great tribulation (this refers to the 7 seals judgments, the 7 bowl judgments, and the 7 trumpet judgments described in Revelation), such as was not seen since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor shall ever be."
She continues with her understanding and interpretation of what she assumes I had missed:
Right here Jesus is saying these judgments which come as described in Revelation will be the worst of history. That conditions will culminate in those 3.5 yrs (the second half of the Great Tribulation), conditions on the earth that have never been seen before - and never will afterwards.
"...no, nor ever shall be," describes the absolute worst of times. That no time in history compares.
We have not seen this time frame in history.
Although the Temple WAS destroyed, although Nero and Domition and others came afterwards. Although the Nazis came, and Stalin and Mussolini and Hussein, world events and world history has NOT seen the worst of it.
And keeping that in mind, Jesus tells His listeners "...till ALL these things be fulfilled" in verse 34. (Capitalized for effect.)
Fraiser moves on to share her thoughts on my comment regarding the rapture:
Your reference to "being raptured" is actually irrelevant since Todd did not mention it.
And then her response to my interpretation of Matthew 24:29-31:
Your explanation of "Christ clearly is referring to gathering those who are righteous and already have passed from mortality and into immortality - they will be gathered" is not at all supported by the text. The text does not support that interpretation at all. No where does it "clearly" refer to this. The trumpet which announces Jesus' arrival here is the same last trumpet in Revelation.
We come to the claim of employing an ad-hominem, false assumption, and Strawman argument:
There is absolutely no need for the ad-hominem against Todd (in the form of the false assumption of) "Are you willing to go that far with your mental eisegesis [of which YOU actually employed by NOT understanding what the text conveys] gymnastics to conclude that Christ is a liar and a false prophet."
In this single question, you have employed ad-hominem, false assumption, AND Strawman - all in one question.
How has he engaged in ANY "mental eisegesis gymnastics" in this post? He hasn't. He has asked direct follow-up questions.
Fraiser justifies her reason for commenting by stating:
I am defending Todd on this one. He politely presents a reply to your comment. He follows up with the direct question of, "Do you see this answered as well?" Then, he engages in the statement of, "yet Jesus is addressing more than one topic." (Which IS true.)
She further makes this assumption regarding her clam that I supposedly engaged in gaslighting:
To which you engage in your lengthy comment opening with an attempt at gaslighting with, "Are you sure about that?" Todd did not ask for your final question in the manner in which you asked it. Discussions need to be civil and respectful, even if folks disagree. Just saying...
Fraiser offers an apology to Todd Giberson where she reiterates her claim that I engaged in ad hominem, making false assumptions, and employed a strawman argument, and attempted gaslighting:
I apologize for Mr. Berman's reply toward you. There was no need for the attitude, the attempted gaslighting, the ad-hominem, the Strawman, or the false assumption. See my reply to him.
Addressing concerns and challenging assumptions
My response focused on two things. First, the context of Matthew 23 and 24 regarding the specific language and who this generation was being referred to. Second, challenging her claims of using ad hominem, making false assumptions, employing a strawman argument, and gaslighting an individual.
Here is the Context - This Generation. Whose generation will those things occur? The Generation of the Disciples and the first century Jewish religious leaders. You claim that the Tribulation Christ described has yet to happen.
There actually is historic evidence regarding the siege and destruction of the City of Jerusalem by the Roman Army in 70 AD. When was the 7-year tribulation? 63-70 AD. THIS IS HISTORICAL FACT BACKED UP BY EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS AND DOWN THROUGH THE CENTURIES.
* Flavius Josephus - The Jewish Wars
* Tacitus - Roman Historian
Notice Christ words - the calamity of the tribulation that will come upon that Generation has not ever occurred prior to those events - NOR AFTER THOSE EVENTS have occurred. That is the exact understanding of what Christ was saying. Which means, if such calamities shall not occur after the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple - then it means that this was not something that will be fulfilled 2000 plus years later.
As for Fraiser's insinuation:
As for my mentioning of mental gymnastics - yes, it is accurate because that is exactly what many people attempt to do with poor Eisegesis interpretations of Matthew 24 and attempt to claim that Christ was speaking of a far distant future generation than what the text actually says. And yes, if one attempts to pigeonhole a far distant yet to be fulfilled tribulation in the distant human future - then Christ lied. He gave a false prophecy because everything he claimed will happen did happen in the life of the Disciples of that generation.
I further continued my response:
Defend all you want- the text is clear when you properly examine it within the historical context of what transpired and is recorded in human history regarding the destruction of the City of Jerusalem and the Temple thereof.
And yes, like I said, those who were watchful and aware of the signs did in fact flee Judea and the City of Jerusalem on the Eve of the Roman Army coming against Jerusalem. They fled to Pella.
Further providing a link from Biblical Archeology Review concerning this subject:
"Jesus, while looking over the temple mount in Jerusalem shortly before his death, prophesied that its beautiful stones would be thrown down within a generation. He warned that the residents should flee Jerusalem to the mountains when they saw the Roman armies surrounding the city. Jesus’ admonition is found in each of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 24:15–22; Mark 13:14–20; Luke 21:20–24). Perhaps Jesus visited Pella during his visit to the Decapolis (Mark 7:31) and Perea (Matthew 19:1; Mark 10:1), and recalling its secure location, cryptically referred to it in this prophecy. Eusebius’s Church History (3.5.3) recounts that the Jewish followers of Jesus heeded his warning and fled to Pella for safety before Jerusalem’s destruction. Birgil Pixner believes that, after the city’s destruction, they returned to Jerusalem to rebuild their Jewish-Christian synagogue on Mount Zion.
I challenged her interpretation - that appears to solely focus on Matthew 24:21 and the Great Tribulation - by bringing her attention back to the full context of Matthew 24, and the immediate context of the surrounding verses of Matthew 24:21. Pertaining to the claim that mentioning the rapture as being irrelevant to the discussion. I pointed out to her that the idea of the rapture came in the late 19th century and is now prevalent among many Evangelical Christians thought and teaching. This includes challenging her to point out where it says that the Angel with the trumpet came down to earth to gather the elect. This includes quoting my previous analysis of Matthew 24:31.
From there, I challenged her accusation of gaslighting:
As for Gaslighting. I really find it quite appalling that you and other Christians throw that term around with serious disregard to what it actually means. Check out my article on what Gaslighting really is all about and then I welcome your sincere apology for making a false statement like that.
I concluded my response to challenge either Fraiser or Giberson to show where I may error in my understanding of Matthew 23-24 as it relates to the initial question of who this generation is referring to:
Now, either you or Todd actually take the time to point out where I error in my presentation of the actual passage of Matthew 23-24. If I am actually shown where I did in fact make an error - I will apologize and correct it. However, if what I presented is factually accurate based on the process of Exegesis of the Scripture passage - then I expect the same - both of you admit your wrong in how you are interpreting Matthew 23-24 and correct your perspective and understanding.
What was the response to this challenge? Fraiser made this comment:
I have already laid out my argument against your interpretation. If you need a more detailed explanation, see my initial comment on this post.
I already demonstrated your attempted gaslighting, your ad-hominem, your Strawman, and your False Assumption. Your Gish-gallop reply is of no effect, nor is it of any interest.
This is nothing more than an arbitrary dismissal of what was presented. Instead of dealing with the proper context of the scripture, engaging in thoughtful and respectful discussion - Fraiser merely dismissed my response and doubled down on her assertion that I was guilty of gaslighting, engaging in ad hominem, building a straw man argument, and making a false assumption through Gish galloping reply.
Inevitably, I was banned from the Facebook Group. This is quite telling of the particular attitude and behavior that is commonplace with these types of social media groups. Many Evangelical and Protestant Christians tend to shut down discussions - make false accusations and attempt to side-step any rational discussion where they are called out for their attitude and behavior.
Regardless, my attempt was to bring a better understanding within a proper exegetical context of who the generation were that Christ spoke of.
No comments:
Post a Comment