The ANSWER. THREE KEY THINGS:
1) Matthew and Mark speak of the "great tribulation" mentioned by Daniel. Luke does not. Luke does mention the fall of Jerusalem, but places that event before the events of the end-times. Thus note this very specific reference from Luke:
Luke 21:5-10 records Jesus' words about events occurring at the time of his second return during his parousia. But note...
" 10 Then he went on to say to them: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; 11 and there will be great earthquakes, and in one place after another pestilences and food shortages; and there will be fearful sights and from heaven great signs.
12 “But before all these things... "
From verse 12 on through verse 24, Jesus describes what will happen to Jerusalem. So the fall of Jerusalem is placed BEFORE the signs of the end-times. That means the destruction of Jerusalem is not part of the signs of his presence but occurs before those signs take place. Luke does not mention the "great tribulation" or Daniel. The fall of Jerusalem is not part of the signs of his presence.
2) The CHRONOLOGY in the Bible tells us the precise year of the 2nd coming. JWs very well know of the "7 times" prophecy which date the 2nd coming 2520 years from the fall of Jerusalem. Granted the chronology from ancient records for the period of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar is difficult and distorted, but the potential dates in 607 BCE, 587 BCE or 529 BCE all within a 57-year period still place the 2nd coming far into the future into the 20th Century in either 1914, 1934 or 1992. So in no way was Jesus speaking of a "natural" genereation not dying out before these things occur.
3) The "unnatural generation" that does not die out. So how is it that "that generation" does not die out before these things occur if they don't occur until sometime between 1914-1992? To answer this we go to Jesus' own words about that generation where he says at Matthew 16:28 that some "standing here that will not taste death at all until first they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." What does this mean? It can mean only one of two things: a) That Jesus would return soon in his kingdom before some of those present would die a natural death at a normal age; or b) That some from the 1st Century would never die over the period of 1900+ years until Jesus returned. Which is correct? It can only be "b" since the 2nd coming must occur in either 1914, 1934 or 1992. After having made this presmise, though, it is confirmed by other scriptures which show that John and Paul were never to die, but to "survive" until the Lord's day. Note how at 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18 that Paul includes himself in the group that would be alive during the Lord's day and how he specifically notes these would "SURVIVE" down to that time, which indicates this was an unusually long time and long lifespan:
1 Thess 4: 15 For this is what we tell YOU by the Lord's word, that we the living who survive to the presence of the Lord shall in no way precede those who have fallen asleep [in death]; 16 because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. 17 Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall always be with [the] Lord."
In other words, the 1st Century Christians fell into two groups. Ones who would die and need to be resurrected just before Christ arrives. A second group of chosen ones would never die but continue living and "surviving" until the Lord arrived. A reasonable question then came up which Paul addresses, which is, whether or not one group or the other would go to heaven before the other. That's a reasonable question. So Paul answers it by saying that the dead in Christ will rise first. Then afterward, all of those in Christ including those who had survived and are still alive when Christ returned would "together" be changed. Huh?
In other words, since Christ himself is in the flesh for the 1000-year reign, those who had died woudl also be resurrected back into the flesh to rule with Christ for 1000 years. This happens before the millennium begins. So at this point, all the elect are now back into physical bodies. Then after the rule with Christ for 1000 years, endure Satan's last attack on post-millennial mankind, then a period for Judgment Day when all the dead come back to be judged, then at that time, (i.e. when all the work is done and there are no more wicked in the earth) do all the elect then put on their new spiritual bodies, all at the same time. Thus no one from either group goes to heaven before any others.
But getting back to that reference about this generation not dying, obviously, if some from that generation in the 1st Century were never to die, then Christ was merely restating what he had before that, some who were alive in the 1st Century woudl not see death until Christ returned. So Christ was not saying that he would return within the time of a normal generation, but that some from that generation would experience an abnormal lifespan down into the end-times. So in no way is Christ a "false prophet" in saying that this generation would not pass away before he returned. Thus, indeed, Paul and John are still alive. I've seen them both.
Now granted, some may find this difficult to believe, but this is what the Bible teaches. If this means you don't have enough faith to believe the Bible, then so be it. But there is a high price for rejecting the Bible, thus dismissing it as being false.
But this answers the generation question. Once you first know that a specific year of the 2nd coming is to occur in the 20th Century, then when Jesus says this generation would not pass away until all those things occur leading up to the 2nd coming, it means that some from that generation would never die until our time--it does not mean Christ would return within the normal lifespan of anyone alive at that time.
Of course, if you can't believe the Bible about Paul and John never dying, then it doesn't matter if you think Jesus is a false prophet or not. But Jesus is not a "textual false prophet." That is, the Scriptures do not contradict this statement but helps us to understand some from the 1st Century would never die and thus are still alive. I got into realizing this when Paul was pointed out to me by holy spirit and I had to rush home and check the Scriptures to see if it recorded his death. Instead I discovered, indeed, some 1st Century Christians were never to die and Paul included himself in that group that would 'survive down to the Lord's day." Fascinating! And true.
LS
