This 'Generation' Shall Not Pass Away Till All Be Fulfilled

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

To me it just wouldn't make any sense if the Lord Jesus meant this:

"This Generation might or might not pass away till all be fulfilled."​

Would it to you?

The bottom line is that something is wrong. For the literal TRUTH to say "Generation"... is false! It makes Jesus into a liar.

Family is congruent with the scriptures. I do believe that this matter was adjusted with selfish intention. We must use multiple manuscripts and all fragments available when attempting to glean the true intent of God through scripture.

I know this happens in prophecy because there is much pride in prophetic interpretation. Daniel and Joseph are epic for prophecy... but they simply relied on God... period. We are in the midst off events that are giving full light to Scriptural intent and the western Eschatology crew is too proud to acknowledge it. This is the kind of thinking that blinded people to Christ's first coming! It's no shock something of this magnitude is possible, in reference to Scriptural tampering.

I will simply say this... I believe there is another famous place like this in prophetic scripture where the word number should be multitude.

So I see "Family" in context of the Jewish nation as biblically congruent and accurate.

This holds much water.

Consider Mt. 12:46-50 in relation to what you are suggesting. It starts to rapidly build a contextual and cross referenced pace.

Cross Ref of Mt. 12:49 that seems to support this

 

[musterion]

To me it just wouldn't make any sense if the Lord Jesus meant this:

"This Generation might or might not pass away till all be fulfilled."​

Would it to you?

No, not any more than when Tetelestai tried to get away from it by saying it simply meant these things would not be fulfilled until these things have been fulfilled, which is utter nonsense.

IF what I've seen offered is correct, there was an unspoken condition underlying, or overlaying, what He said...something else (which was evidently understood at the time) must happen before all those things He described could happen.

Since those things He described have not happened yet...meaning the condition, whatever it was, has not been met...what could that condition have been?

Only one thing I can think of, going back through John the baptizer (clue!) all the way back to Moses.

 

[musterion]

Another way of looking at it.

If those elements aren't actually there in any reliable source text (meaning that's why they are not found in any translation, at least that I am aware of), that raises the question of why somebody bothered to insert them. I don't see what the point could possibly be.

On the other hand: if those elements ARE present in texts, as some sources indicate, but are not accounted for by translators, the question is why not?

What I can't buy is an explanation I've seen that acknowledges that they are indeed there but dismisses the issue as unimportant; that they really don't mean anything worth translating...else translators would have done so. Nope, not buying that.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Another way of looking at it.

If those elements aren't actually there in any reliable source text (meaning that's why they are not found in any translation, at least that I am aware of), that raises the question of why somebody bothered to insert them. I don't see what the point could possibly be.

On the other hand: if those elements ARE present in texts, as some sources indicate, but are not accounted for by translators, the question is why not?

What I can't buy is an explanation I've seen that acknowledges that they are indeed there but dismisses the issue as unimportant; that they really don't mean anything worth translating...else translators would have done so. Nope, not buying that.

Do the words... anointed King of Israel have anything to do with what you are eluding to?

 

[musterion]

mmmm...nope. Why?

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

mmmm...nope. Why?

Bummer... back to the guessing factory

Perhaps another "clue"?

 

[Tambora]

To me it just wouldn't make any sense if the Lord Jesus meant this:

"This Generation might or might not pass away till all be fulfilled."​

Would it to you?

Nah.
That's because it doesn't say that.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

mmmm...nope. Why?

Then how do you think the verse should be translated?

 

[musterion]

Then how do you think the verse should be translated?

Not sure. I've seen "if" or "should" suggested to account for both an and the subjunctive mood. I believe the "till" in the KJ is the point where it's kinda-sorta acknowledged but it just does not come across in English.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Not sure. I've seen "if" or "should" suggested to account for both an and the subjunctive mood. I believe the "till" in the KJ is the point where it's kinda-sorta acknowledged but it just does not come across in English.

Can you give us another verse which has the same configuration so that we can examine it?

 

[musterion]

Now that's a good suggestion for a weekend project. I don't know of one but will look.

 

[musterion]

Since this does relate directly to the topic of the thread, we'll start here and see where it goes.

302 án – a conditional particle expressing possibility, based on a preexisting condition (stipulation, prerequisite). This adds an important theoretical (hypothetical) sense to a statement which narrows down the sense of that statement.

302 (an) "indicates what can (could) occur – but only on certain conditions, or by the combination of certain fortuitous causes" (J. Thayer). Only the context determines how 302 (án) "limits" ("conditions") the statement by the possibility (condition) involved. Accordingly, 302 (án) is often called the "untranslatable particle." However, it always influences ("conditions") its sentence and is key to properly understanding the verse (passage) in which it occurs.

[Though 302 (án) is not easily "translatable," it always conveys important meaning. (The KJV sometimes translates an as "perchance," "haply.")

302 (an) is used about 300 times in the NT, introducing statements that have conditional or hypothetical meaning.]

http://biblehub.com/greek/302.htm

 

[musterion]

http://www.ntgreek.net/lesson29.htm#subjunctive mood

Up to this point, we have focused on the indicative mood. In the first level course, lesson 2, we learned that the different moods indicate different degrees of contingency. The degree of contingency inherent in the indicative mood is zero.

Now we come to the subjunctive mood which indicates some contingency. Greek grammarians had various names for the subjunctive mood, but one name was ἡ διστακτικὴ ἔγκλισις , "the mood expressive of doubt." In contrast, the indicative mood was called ἡ ὁριστικὴ ἔγκλισις , "the definitive mood." (Notice the word ὁριστική and think back to our discussion of the significance of the term, aorist.)

The subjunctive mood is illustrated in the following sentences:

Might you eat some spinach?
Were I to eat spinach, I would get sick.
Should I get sick, I would not be able to go to work.
If you were unable to go to work, you would not be paid.


​

In English, we use the words "were," "should," "might," or "would" when we are speaking in the subjunctive mode. In each of the sentences above, only the possibility of eating spinach, or of being sick, or of being unable to go to work, or of not being paid is being considered. The reality remains contingent upon future developments. The case is contemplated with the action being hypothesized. Notice that although we will talk about present subjunctives, the subjunctive naturally looks to the future for the resolution of the contingency.

 

[jamie]

Somewhere it says all things were created by God through Christ. If that's true it would have to include his family.

Let's say for the sake of discussion that the Father is Spirit. If that is also true why wouldn't the Father's family be Spirit?

How many generations of children does the Father have at this time keeping in mind that Jesus is our brother? We might even think of Jesus as our firstborn brother. Scripture may have suggested that somewhere.

Huh?

 

[musterion]

From the last link:

The subjunctive mood is largely disappearing from English, or perhaps it is more accurate to say that English usage is increasingly relying on indicators of contingency other than the words should, might, would, et al. Accordingly, your translation of subjunctives may be less characterized by these words than is the King James Version of the Bible.

Wonder if a translation could be, "This generation shall not pass away UNLESS..." or "This generation shall not pass away IF..." or something along that line.

I'd love for Tam and Steko to chime in on this.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Since this does relate directly to the topic of the thread, we'll start here and see where it goes.

302 án – a conditional particle expressing possibility, based on a preexisting condition (stipulation, prerequisite). This adds an important theoretical (hypothetical) sense to a statement which narrows down the sense of that statement.

Where would we find such a preexisting condition in the context?

Wonder if a translation could be, "This generation shall not pass away UNLESS..." or "This generation shall not pass away IF..." or something along that line.

Unless what? If what? Is there something in the context which answers that question?

 

[Tambora]

From the last link:



Wonder if a translation could be, "This generation shall not pass away UNLESS..." or "This generation shall not pass away IF..." or something along that line.

I'd love for Tam and Steko to chime in on this.

To me the verse clearly says that the generation will not pass til all is fulfilled.
The contingency clause would be answered by "till all is fulfilled".
But yes, it does leave it open to whether the generation has to continue afterwards (after all is fulfilled).

In other words, this verse does not guarantee that the nation/family/race (generation) will not pass away after all is fulfilled.
They might and they might not, so another verse would have to be presented that does guarantee that they will never pass away.

This verse alone does not guarantee they will never ever pass, but it does guarantee that they will not pass at least until the point that all is fulfilled.

 

[musterion]

Where would we find such a preexisting condition in the context?

I don't have it in front of me but in the context of the passage itself, I'm not sure you would. In the context of His ministry, and that of John before Him, the context was Israel's national repentance. They either would or they wouldn't and EVERYTHING hinged on that, did it not?

 

[musterion]

To me the verse clearly says that the generation will not pass til all is fulfilled.
The contingency clause would be answered by "till all is fulfilled" . . . it does guarantee that they will not pass at least until the point that all is fulfilled.

Explain this to me again because I'm slow. To tell them that that generation (however one defines "generation" but that's another can of worms) would not pass away until all that He described had come to pass...that's a very certain thing. As in, "You can bank on it." So where's the conditionality/uncertainty in that? I don't see any at all.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

This verse alone does not guarantee they will never ever pass, but it does guarantee that they will not pass at least until the point that all is fulfilled.

Good point, Tambora. I think that you got it right.

They might and they might not, so another verse would have to be presented that does guarantee that they will never pass away.

As I said, I think that the correct translation is "family" and not "generation." And this verse does guarantee that family will not pass away:

"Thus says the LORD, Who gives the sun for light by day And the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar; The LORD of hosts is His name: If this fixed order departs From before Me, declares the LORD, Then the offspring of Israel also will cease from being a nation before Me forever" (Jer.31:35-36).​

According to the Lord as long as the sun and moon remain in the sky the offspring of Israel will remain "being a nation" before Him.