Jesus made many, many promises to his disciples. Some of these promises were prophesies about his second coming. Here are just a few recorded in the Gospel of Matthew: see Mat 10:23, 16:27-28.23:34-36, 24:34. However let’s just look at the last one of these in more detail:
I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass from the scene until all these things take place.
Jesus and his apostles prophesied many times about his imminent second coming, and yet countless numbers of believers today still hold that no such return took place? So was Jesus wrong? Or have they have misunderstood what had been said?
Famed Christian apologist C S Lewis wrote a collection of essays, called ‘The World’s Last Night’, (Harvest Books, 1st edition, November 4, 2002). In that book Lewis wrote:
“It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else.”
He goes on: “It is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible. Yet how teasing, also, that within fourteen words of it should come the statement “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” The one exhibition of error and the one confession of ignorance grow side by side. That they stood thus in the mouth of Jesus himself, and were not merely placed thus by the reporter, we surely need not doubt . . . . . . . he would never have recorded the confession of ignorance at all; he could have had no motive for doing so except a desire to tell the whole truth. And unless later copyists were equally honest they would never have preserved the (apparently) mistaken prediction about “this generation” after the passage of time had shown the (apparent) mistake. This passage (Mark 13:30-32) and the cry “Why hast thou forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34) together make up the strongest proof that the New Testament is historically reliable. The evangelists have the first great characteristic of honest witnesses: they mention facts which are, at first sight, damaging to their main contention. The facts are these: that Jesus professed himself (in some sense) ignorant, and within a moment showed that he really was so. ….”
So Lewis believed Jesus prophesied that he would return in that same generation. Lewis did not attempt to twist any words of Jesus to make them talk about some future generation, like some commentators. Lewis then concluded that those prophesies were not fulfilled at that time. So Jesus and his apostles were delusional.
Lewis’ error stems from unrealistic expectations about what Jesus had in mind: Jesus prophesied the imminent end of the world, yet the world is still here. Jesus was wrong.
But it was not to be the end of the world. In 70 AD, Jesus came and went, having finished every single thing he promised to do, and the world is still with us today.
But why did Lewis then not reject Jesus and the apostles and return to atheism? For Lewis, the high status of Christ remained! This makes no sense. If Lewis’ ideas were correct, it would make Jesus a liar and false prophet.
The Bible defines a false prophet as one who prophesies events that do not come to pass. If someone prophesied that a specific events would take place within a specific time and that time were to come and go without the event happening, then he could legitimately be labelled as a false prophet.
So dear reader, can you see that if you think Jesus did not come just as he promised, within that generation, you must conclude that Jesus was a false prophet.
Jesus said that he did not know “the day or the hour” of his coming. But he emphatically knew the generation within which he would come—his own, and that of his first followers!
What Lewis held was the wrong notion that Jesus’ return would mean the end of the world. He then decided to question Jesus’ understanding, rather than his own.
Dear reader, are you making the same mistake as this greatly esteemed apologist? Perhaps you should question your own understanding, rather than the Lord Jesus’ understanding? Hey?
Ian Thomson 