Kata Markon

["Phil Campbell" <philcam AT tpg.com.au>]

Harry,
The best solution is to see that Jesus is actually talking about the
cross/resurrection/ascension, where in terms of Daniel 7, the Son of Man
comes in the clouds TO THE ANCIENT OF DAYS, from where he rules.
So, instead of assuming he's talking about the parousia (which I think is a
later theological reflection, rather than a textual one), we need to follow
the thread leading up to this point, where Jesus identifies the cross as his
path to kingship. His glory will come from being "last" rather than "first."
The places on his "right and left" as he comes into his glory have indeed
been reserved - but for two criminals. The time notes in Mark 13 - will it
be rooster crow, or midnight? - play themselves out as the cross-crisis
draws nearer. "Don't go to sleep - keep watch" in Mark 13 plays itself out
in the Garden of Gesthemane.

Enough to start with?

Phil Campbell
Mitchelton Presbyterian Church
Queensland Australia



----- Original Message -----
From: <HStaiti AT aol.com>
To: "Kata Markon" <gmark AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, 3 January 2001 7:36 am
Subject: [gmark] Mark 13.30 "tauta panta"& "hey genea"


> I have got a problem and need some resolution...
>
> At the end of his apocalyptic discourse, Mark does not write exact ~time~
> when the parousa will take place, but he does give us a definite ~time
> period~ before which they will take place.
>     "~This generation~ will certainly not pass away until all
>      ~these things~ have happened." V.30
>
> We have to acknowledge the difficulty here. "All these things" were to
happen
> in "this generation."  Since all of the things described in 5-23 did
happen
> in the generation of the first century Christians, and since the Son of
Man
> did not return as predicted in verses 24-27, and since we are assurred in
> verses 28-30,  there seems to be a tremendeous grammatical difficulty
here.
>
> The parable says that the return is to be immanent - like summer before a
> budding fig tree.
>
> Two interpretations have historically been offered to get around this
problem
> 1.  "This Generation" may also be interpreted "this race."
> That is to say, "'The Jewish Race' will survive, not pass away, until the
end
> of the age."
> Or mankind in general, "Humanity will survive, not pass away, until the
end
> of the age."
> Or Christians, "Believers will survive, not pass away, until the end of
the
> age."
>
> However, of the 26 time "hey genea" is used in the NT, it is never used
> except as "the present generation."
>
> 2.  It seems that "this Generation" is more easily interpreted as the
literal
> generation of the first century which actually experienced all of "these
> things" in 13.5-23 and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. However,
that
> cannot be if the solemnity of v.30-31 is taken seriously.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Is it possible that Jesus and the gospel writers intentially used such an
> ambiguous word as "genea," purposely used knowing that it could be used in
a
> narrower or a wider sense?
>
> I need some help...
>
>
> Peace to you,
> Harry Staiti
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Evangel Assembly of God
>
> "A Life-Giving Church"
> www.EvangelAssemblyOfGod.org (UPDATED Jan 2, 2001)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to gmark as: phil AT mpc.org.au
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
>