This refers to a prediction in what’s called the Olivet Discourse. Some famous skeptics have used this prediction to reject Jesus’ divinity. The Olivet Discourse appears in three Gospels (Matthew: 24:1–25:46, Mark: 13:1–37, Luke: 21:5–36). Many people view this narrative as describing Jesus’ return to earth in what’s known as the Second Coming. Others see the section as describing a preliminary return of Jesus to the sky, but not to the earth. This action is supposed to take away the Christians and leave the rest of the world behind. This event has been called the rapture, though some people use the word rapture to mean something else.
In all three Gospels accounts of the Olivet Discourse, Jesus is quoted as saying that “this generation” will not pass away until all these things happened (Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:32). So, if this discourse deals with the second coming or a rapture, it looks like Jesus made a false prediction. In my opinion, this issue cannot be addressed by a simple look at popular English versions of the New Testament. A proper answer requires looking at ancient Greek renditions of the New Testament, understanding figures of speech, recognizing references to Old Testament verses, and knowing a bit of the cultural background of the times.
First off, I don’t consider a preliminary return of Jesus to extract the church as an option. I have listened to many Christians present this version of the rapture concept, and I will continue to listen. But, as of right now, I just don’t see this taught clearly anywhere in the Bible. I discuss this further in a postscript below.
What about the idea that Jesus falsely predicted a first century second coming? Here are four counter responses of which I am aware:
- The Greek word translated generation could be translated as race. I find this proposal weak. This word clearly doesn’t mean race when used in many other places in the New Testament (including other places in Matthew’s Gospel).
- “This generation” could mean the future generation in which the events happen. This can’t be ruled out, but it’s hard for me to buy. When describing the events, Jesus keeps saying “you”, not a future generation.
- The passage deals with the first century destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, not Jesus’s return. The discourse clearly began with that context based on Mark 13:1-4. And, the destruction did happen in that generation. The temple destruction was the physical end of a spiritual transition. Instead of symbolic temple sacrifices for sins, Jesus’ sacrifice by death on the cross now paid for sins. Thus, when Jesus says: “…then the end will come” (Matthew 24:14), it means the end of the temple system, not the end of the world.
- The passage talks about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, but also comments on end of the world issues. If this position is chosen, then the Jerusalem destruction is what got fulfilled in the generation of the Olivet Discourse.
Either 3 or 4 explains Jesus’ prediction, but it must be recognized that the language of the Olivet Discourse includes figures of speech and references to Old Testament verses. An example of the former is “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken” (Matthew 24:29). How do I know this constitutes figures of speech and not a literal supernatural astronomy event? I know because in Acts 2:20 and Isaiah 13:10, similar language described events that have now already occurred. These events involved a traumatic transition. We use these types of expressions in modern times. For example, an old song by the Walker Brothers about a breakup said: “The sun ain’t gonna shine anymore. The moon ain’t gonna rise in the sky.”
An example of an Old Testament reference in the Olivet Discourse is “At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory” (Mark 13:26). Matthew 24:30 says something similar: “And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.” An NIV Bible footnote gives a different translation for part of the sentence in Matthew 24:30. The footnote reads: “At that time the tribes of the land will see…” For reasons I won’t go into, the footnote gives a better translation than “all the peoples of the earth.”
This could refer to Jesus’ second coming, but two alternative views have been raised. Possibly, Jesus’ quote merges both views. One view points to passages like Isaiah 19:1: “A prophecy against Egypt: See, the Lord rides on a swift cloud and is coming to Egypt.” Passages like this refer to God using an army to enact judgement. That would fit the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in “this generation.”
This proposition is reinforced by Jesus using similar language about coming on clouds later when he appeared before Jewish religious leaders (Matthew 26:64). In this case, Jesus’ statement comes right after complaints were made about Jesus saying he would destroy the temple. So, the context of this second clouds language came in a discussion about destroying the temple. Such a threat to the city and temple would explain part of the extreme anger the leaders felt toward Jesus. These leaders’ power and livelihood depended on Jerusalem and the temple. One big reason they wanted Jesus killed was a fear of the Romans destroying the temple: “If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our temple and our nation” (John 11:48).
One problem with this idea is the timing associated with Jesus’ statement to the Sanhedrin. Jesus said: “From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven (Matthew 26:64, bolding mine). Jerusalem and the temple were not going to be destroyed until later, not now. However, Jesus may have been referring to the transition of temple sacrifice to Jesus’ ultimate sacrifice. This goes with Jesus’ saying that he would destroy the temple and rebuild it in 3 days (John 2:19). This was a reference to his body as a temple (John 2:21). His body was going to die and be resurrected as a replacement for physical temple sacrifices. This was about to happen even though the physical temple in Jerusalem was not destroyed until later.
The other view of the Olivet Discourse verse about clouds has Jesus taking his place in Heaven as having authority over all the world (a fulfillment of Daniel 7:13-14). The Olivet Discourse wordings show similarity with the Daniel passage. This coronation of Jesus as king would be taking place shortly after Jesus’ statement to the Sanhedrin (which could explain “from now on”). However, two problems arise with this interpretation. First, in the Olivet Discourse, the timing of the coming in the clouds seems to be intertwined with the destruction of Jerusalem. A number of Bible verses suggest that Jesus’ coronation happened before the Jerusalem destruction. Also, in both the Olivet Discourse and in the Sanhedrin exchange, Jesus said people will see what’s happening. People on earth wouldn’t have seen a coronation event occurring in heaven in the first century. It is possible that Jesus was talking about both the destruction of Jerusalem and the coronation. The coronation would set up the destruction of Jerusalem, which would be a visible event.
So, I think that I have presented a good case that “this generation” referred to the destruction of Jerusalem. I view the addition of the coronation into the picture as also possibly true. Despite claiming that I have a strong case for the Jerusalem destruction explanation, the verse right after Matthew’s clouds of power and glory quote may seem to wreck everything. The verse reads: “And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matthew 24:31). I have to admit that this one threw me at first. It appears to talk about the end of the world when angels gather all God’s people from all over the earth. It could be that the verses right before 31 are about the fall of Jerusalem, but then Jesus interjects a short far future commentary into the teaching. In other words, Jesus could be saying that first Jerusalem is destroyed and then, a long time later, the end of the world occurs. However, another possibility also exists.
The Greek word translated as angels (angelous) only means messengers. It can refer to celestial beings, but in multiple New Testament passages, the same root word is applied to humans. An example involves John the Baptist being called a messenger (Matthew 11:10). Similarly, ancient Greek versions of the Old Testament use this word to describe human messengers. Thus, Matthew 24:31 may be saying that after the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, God’s messengers will go into all the earth to bring people to a belief in Jesus.
This had already started. Jesus said that his message would be preached to the Roman Empire before “the end” came (the destruction of the temple ending the symbolic sacrifice era) (Matthew 24:14). The English NIV doesn’t say the Roman world. It says “the whole world,” but saying the Roman world would be more appropriate. The Greek root word used here is oikoumenē. It refers not to the planet earth, but the “world” of the people in a conversation. This same root word appears in Luke 2:1 and Acts 11:28. In these two verses, the newest NIV Bible does translate the Greek word as the Roman world. On the other hand, in Matthew 24:31, after the Jerusalem destruction, messengers go from “one end of the heavens to the other.” So, before the destruction of Jerusalem, the Gospel message had started spreading in the Roman world, but after the destruction, the message would spread more to the whole planet.
Either this explanation or the time lapse idea stated above works with my general point; this point is that the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple solves the “this generation” problem. This interpretation strengthens the case for Jesus’ divinity. That’s because the prediction of Jerusalem’s destruction in “this generation” was recorded before the event. I won’t go into all the evidence for this timing except for one idea. If Luke’s Gospel was written after the city destruction, Luke would have likely written about both the prediction and fulfillment. Luke did this very thing in the Book of Acts about another prediction and fulfillment (Acts 11:28).
Postscript. The term rapture can mean different things to different people. However, the term rapture is usually applied to an event where the church is secretly taken up to heaven while all others remain on earth. This preliminary return of Jesus is supposed to occur before a 7 year tribulation period (though the Bible never actually mentions a 7 year tribulation period anywhere). At a point after the rapture, Jesus is supposed to make a full return. This concept got its main boost from writings in the 1800s promoting a view called dispensationalism. As noted above, I am open to hearing arguments for this view point, but right now, I just don’t see it as viable. From what I have found, this philosophy was not generally taught in the early church. More importantly, a preliminary rapture before Jesus second coming is not taught clearly anywhere in the Bible.
Teachings on a preliminary rapture commonly use two Gospel mentions of people pairs:
“Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left” (Matthew 24:40-41).
“…two people will be in one bed; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding grain together; one will be taken and the other left” (Luke 17:34-35).
The Luke quote is not actually from the Olivet Discourse. However, Jesus seems to be talking about the same things he later brings up again in the Olivet Discourse. The two quotations just cited have been wrongly interpreted to mean that one is taken to heaven while the other is left on earth. The first problem with this idea is Jesus’ answer to the question of where this happens. His answer is “Where there is a dead body, there the vultures will gather” (Luke 17:37). This sounds like the killing that took place in Jerusalem’s destruction, not like people being taken to heaven. Moreover, the Greek word translated “left” is translated forgiven in a lot of other Bible verses. In another part of the Olivet Discourse, this word is used to say one stone is not “left” on another. Thus, the idea of one of a pair being left has to do with releasing or being set free. So, the one left is the fortunate one, not the one taken.
To make matters worse for the rapture view, Jesus compared the situation to the times of Noah and of Sodom and Gomorrah (Luke 17:26-37). In both cases, one group of people died and the others escaped death. That sounds more like a comparison to the Jerusalem destruction than describing a rapture. Moreover, Jesus warned that when certain things started happening in Jerusalem, people should get out. One of these signs was the abomination of desolation prophesied in the Bible book of Daniel. This was fulfilled initially in around 167 BC by a Greek ruler. Jesus said something like this would happen again. This did happen progressively through the Roman army’s actions against Jerusalem.* Jesus said that when the signs of trouble appear, people should leave quickly without looking back. If people were going to be raptured to heaven, they would not need to leave the city without looking back. So, absolutely nothing in the Olive Discourse nor in Luke 17 teaches about a secret rapture.
Some people try to use 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 and 1 Corinthians 15:51-54 to sell that a rapture that happens before Jesus’ second coming. However, as with the Olivet Discourse, these two passages say absolutely nothing about a secret rapture with non-Christians being left on earth. On the contrary to a secret event, both passages talk about a trumpet, which indicates something public.
Neither of these two Bible sections gives a lot of detail. I Corinthians mainly just says that some Christians won’t die, but will suddenly be given a new body. The Thessalonians passage adds that Jesus will come down from Heaven. That sounds just like how two angels in Acts 1:11 said that Jesus will return to earth. The angels said that Jesus would return just like he left. In Acts, he ascended into the sky from the earth; at the second coming, he will follow the same path, only in reverse (descend from the sky to the earth).
One argument offered against the second coming interpretation of Thessalonians is that this passage says people will meet Jesus in the air (not on earth). However, the Greek words describing this are thought to reflect a cultural custom of the day. When a dignitary would arrive in a city, trumpets would sound and people would meet the dignitary outside the city. Then, the people would accompany the dignitary back into the city. So, Jesus will be met in the air and return with his followers to triumphantly set foot on the earth.
Also of note is that the I Thessalonians and I Corinthians sections both seem to link with Revelation 11. All three sections mention a return of Jesus and the dead in Christ being rewarded. All three also mention a trumpet call. I Corinthians 15 specifically mentions a “last trumpet.” Similarly, Revelation 11 mentions the last of 7 trumpets. These resemblances suggests that all three passages speak of the same events. The Revelation 11 section clearly speaks of the final arrival of Jesus to earth as ruler. Therefore, the 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians passages likely also speak of Jesus’ second coming (not a preliminary return with a church rapture).
Some fine points of this whole subject can be debated. However, what is clear is that not one single place in the Bible actually states that a rapture of the church will occur before Jesus’ second coming. A preliminary rapture belief may seem harmless, but it can it can promote an escape mentality. Nobody should tell a Christian in the Congo that they will be raptured out of a great tribulation. They already face a great tribulation.
*For further description of the Romans and the abomination of desolation, see: https://www.revelationrevolution.org/the-abomination-that-causes-desolation-explained/. I haven’t fully decided on this writing’s interpretation of the numbers in the Book of Daniel, though I find them interesting. However, the parts about the Roman army and the abomination make strong sense to me.