Does Luke 19:44 disprove Preterism?

[tetelestai]

Luke 19:44 confirms that "this generation" refers specifically to the generation of Jesus' contemporaries of Jews who rejected Him

(Matt 23:36) Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

(Luke 17:25) But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.

Now, we look at Luke 19:44, and we are told the reason the temple was destroyed with not one stone left standing upon another was because that generation of Jews ("this generation") rejected Christ Jesus:

(Luke 19:44) 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another, because you did not recognize the time of God’s coming to you.”

 

[tetelestai]

Now, the 3 verses that give Futurists/Dispensationalists fits:

(Luke 21:32 KJV) Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

(Mark 13:30 KJV) Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.

(Matt 24:34 KJV) Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

 

[tetelestai]

(Luke 11:30 KJV) For as Jonas was a sign unto the Ninevites, so shall also the Son of man be to this generation.

Once again, the phrase "this generation" refers specifically to the generation of Jesus' contemporaries, not some future generation of people.

 

[chrysostom]

A really long time.

It's hyperbole.

In the OT, cattle on a "thousand hills" didn't mean exactly 1,000 hills, it meant a lot of hills.

when is a literal interpretation okay?

 

[tetelestai]

when is a literal interpretation okay?

When it's literal.

(John 21:11) So Simon Peter climbed back into the boat and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn.

I believe there were literally 153 fish in the net.

 

[chrysostom]

When it's literal.

how do you know

when it is literal?

 

[iamaberean]

when is a literal interpretation okay?

When it has a qualifier before it, such as one,two, three, etc. In these cases it would mean 1000, 2000 or 3000, otherwise it is an unknown amount.

When used in Matthew it means 10,000 talents.
Mat 18:24 And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents.

When used in Revelation it means in the allotted (unknown) time.
Rev 20:7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison

 

[tetelestai]

how do you know

when it is literal?

You'll have to ask Aristotle.

 

[chrysostom]

You'll have to ask Aristotle.

I did
and
he told me
to always go with the literal interpretation unless it doesn't make sense

does that make sense to you?

 

[George Affleck]

how do you know

when it is literal?

The Bible is ALWAYS to be understood literally; that is, as it was written. Literal means - actual; as intended by the Holy Spirit and by those who penned (literated) the words. It does not mean physical.

Interpretive questions are always between a physical or non-physical interpretation which depends on the writing style of the author(s).

A literal interpretation is that which discovers the authentic meaning of the text in its grammatical forms with consideration for (1) the historical, cultural and linguistic context, (2) the author's presentation style and literary devices, and (3) the integrity and harmony of the Scriptures.

Hence, "Our God is a consuming fire." is literal, but in a non-physical sense.

All arguments regarding difficult Bible passages are interpreted according to the interpreter's percentage level of tolerance for substantial vs. non-substantial. Nearly no one allows the Bible to speak for itself; rather, they bring their systems to bear on the texts.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Mysteryboy (aka Musterion) does indeed claim that Luke 19:44 disproves Preterism because Mysteryboy is a Darby Follower (Dispensationalist) and Luke 19:44 proves his Dispensationalism wrong.

Therefore, Mysteryboy has to claim that some stones were still standing after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.

However, Luke 19:44 confirms Preterism, and the eyewitness of account of Josephus proves Mysteryboy wrong.

I don't know Darby, but I like him because, you don't.

 

[tetelestai]

I did
and
he told me
to always go with the literal interpretation unless it doesn't make sense

does that make sense to you?

Yes, but that doesn't clear anything up.

"making sense" is subjective.

To me it makes sense that "thousand years" is hyperbole. To a Futurist/Dispensationalist it makes sense to them that "thousand years" is exactly 1,000 years.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Tet, all of those verse you quoted show that yes, they were part of "this generation". I am not sure how that denies what I wrote earlier, that it's possible this generation refers to all time before the 2nd coming.

 

[tetelestai]

I don't know Darby,

Yet you parrot him.

That's rather odd wouldn't you say?

 

[chrysostom]

Yes, but that doesn't clear anything up.

"making sense" is subjective.

aristotle also told me about

common sense

do you believe there is such a thing?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Hey TeT, I know that anybody you don't like, is more than likely on the right path.
I don't believe one iota of what you have to say. Your crazy belief that Christ
already returned in 70AD in the form of the Roman army is enough to prove
you're some kind of nutty type guy.

 

[tetelestai]

I am not sure how that denies what I wrote earlier, that it's possible this generation refers to all time before the 2nd coming.

You can claim it all you want, but you have zero verses that support your claim, and many verses that prove your claim wrong.

Nowhere in the Bible does "this generation" refer to people of many generations.

Go to biblegateway.com and do a search for "generations" (plural) in the KJV.

There is a reason why the word "generation" is used in the singular and plural.

You're taking the singular meaning, and claiming it is plural.

What you are doing makes no sense.

You're only doing it because your trying to force the verses to fit your Dispensationalism.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Yet you parrot him.

That's rather odd wouldn't you say?

Nah. It just shows that him and I are at one with the truth. Unlike yourself.

 

[tetelestai]

Hey TeT, I know that anybody you don't like, is more than likely on the right path.
I don't believe one iota of what you have to say. Your crazy belief that Christ
already returned in 70AD in the form of the Roman army is enough to prove
you're some kind of nutty type guy.

GM, you're just another Darby Follower in denial.

 

[tetelestai]

aristotle also told me about

common sense

do you believe there is such a thing?

Sure

(Proverbs 2:7) He grants a treasure of common sense to the honest....