Was Jesus Wrong In Matthew 24:34?

[Hidden In Him]

Last year, a thread was created which declared Jesus to essentially be a false prophet. The posts stated:

"I am skeptical about Jesus being who he claimed to be (I'm not a Christian btw)... 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." Moses words in Deuteronomy 18:21-22 state, “But you may wonder, ‘How will we know whether or not a prophecy is from the Lord?’ If the prophet speaks in the Lord’s name but his prediction does not happen or come true, you will know that the Lord did not give that message. That prophet has spoken without my authority and need not be feared." Surely, either Jesus' prophecy is truthful or he is made a false prophet by Moses' words?

The actual verse in question is this: "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." (Matthew 24:34)

The above mentioned thread was shut down since non-Christians are no longer allowed to post except in Questions and Answers, but to answer his "dilemma" here, it is simply this: The common translation of γενεὰ in the expression "οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη" using the word "generation" is actually in error. γενεὰ was used of an "age" as well, and that is what the Lord was referring to here. He was saying "This age - i.e. the church age, prior to the millennium - will not pass away until all these things are fulfilled."

Did the apostles interpret Him to mean He was returning in their time? Yes, it appears they did. But our Lord knew what He was saying, and warned them in that very same Chapter NOT to get lackadaisical, should He not return right away, lest they began to spiritually abuse His people. He was signaling He was well aware His return would not be soon, though it may have been to their benefit to believe it was.

44 Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. 45 "Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his master made ruler over his household, to give them food in due season? 46 Blessed is that servant whom his master, when he comes, will find so doing. 47 Assuredly, I say to you that he will make him ruler over all his goods. 48 But if that evil servant says in his heart, 'My master is delaying his coming,' 49 and begins to beat his fellow servants, and to eat and drink with the drunkards, 50 the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him and at an hour that he is not aware of, 51 and will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 24:44-51)

Any other responses to the argument raised by the non-Christian are welcome. I am simply presenting mine.

Blessings in Christ,
Hidden In Him

 

[for_his_glory]

This generation, Matthew 24:34 means generational line of those who follow Christ and endure all things until the end of days and Christ returns. Generation can refer to a group of people, a period of time, or even a lineage

Matthew, Mark and Luke are three disciples who wrote of the same witness as they testify of what Jesus gave as answers to the three questions the disciples asked Him. When shall these things be? What shall be the sign of they coming and the end of the world? Matthew 24:3

The first thing Jesus proceeds to tell them is that of the destruction of the Temple of God that happened in 70AD and then proceeds to speak of the beginning of sorrows, Matthew 24:4-8, Rev 6:1-17, and not to be deceived nor be troubled for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

Matthew 24:9-26 Jesus tells the disciples of the afflicting trials and tribulations that the abomination of desolations that Daniel spoke of, Daniel Chapter 7, 9, 11; Rev Chapter 13, that they must endure all the persecutions even to death while preaching the Gospel, Matthew 10:28, during the six seals, seven trumpets and seven vial judgments until Christ returns.

Jerusalem has been destroyed twice, besieged 23 times, attacked 52 times, and captured and recaptured 44 times, but God's covenant promises stand forever given to all who will come to Him by His mercy and grace through faith and believe in His only begotten Son Christ Jesus, John 3:16-17.

 

[Hidden In Him]

This generation, Matthew 24:34 means generational line of those who follow Christ and endure all things until the end of days and Christ returns. Generation can refer to a group of people, a period of time, or even a lineage

That's another plausible interpretation, FHG, and thanks for posting.

The reason I somewhat favor "age" is because it renders the expression akin to "Heaven and earth shall not pass away," but it's not a slam dunk. I believe the Lord sometimes used words that could have more than one meaning so that His people would have to seek Him out for the truest interpretations; something we are still doing to this day.

Blessings,
- H

 

[Hidden In Him]

Btw, the original post was by Wheat Field, who had originally posted this:

Lay Anglican theologian and author C.S. Lewis wrote the following (from 'The world's last night and other essays' - 1960):

"Say what you like" we shall be told, "the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. 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."

Lewis described this verse (Mathew 24:34, Luke 21:32 & Mark 13:30) as the 'most embarrassing verse in the Bible'.

Are the sceptics right that this represents a serious obstacle to faith?

 

[Hidden In Him]

Lay Anglican theologian and author C.S. Lewis wrote the following (from 'The world's last night and other essays' - 1960):

"Say what you like" we shall be told, "the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. 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."

Lewis described this verse (Mathew 24:34, Luke 21:32 & Mark 13:30) as the 'most embarrassing verse in the Bible'.

Are the sceptics right that this represents a serious obstacle to faith?

Wheat Field. In keeping with the OP, I would say absolutely not (i.e. to the notion it presents an obstacle to faith). Lewis was refuting an argument that arose from a faulty translation of the text.

By the way, what page of The World's Last Night And Other Essays is this quote found in?

 

[Johann!@#]

Wheat Field. In keeping with the OP, I would say absolutely not (i.e. to the notion it presents an obstacle to faith). Lewis was refuting an argument that arose from a faulty translation of the text.

By the way, what page of The World's Last Night And Other Essays is this quote found in?

I believe it's this?

“The Most Embarrassing Verse in the Bible” – C.S. Lewis

Here is C.S. Lewis’s explanation of the problem: “Say what you like,” we shall be told, “the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New…

bloggingtheology.net

J.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I believe it's this?

“The Most Embarrassing Verse in the Bible” – C.S. Lewis

Here is C.S. Lewis’s explanation of the problem: “Say what you like,” we shall be told, “the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. It is clear from the New…

bloggingtheology.net

J.

Thank you, sir.

Found a PDF. The context states the following, and He raises an interesting question. I will quote the passage first:

"Say what you like" we shall be told, "the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. 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."

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. Unless the reporter were perfectly honest 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, then, are these: that Jesus professed himself (in some sense) ignorant, and within a moment showed that he really was so. To believe in the Incarnation, to believe that he is God, makes it hard to understand how he could be ignorant; but also makes it certain that, if he said he could be ignorant, then ignorant he could really be. For a God who can be ignorant is less baffling than a God who falsely professes ignorance. The answer of theologians is that the God-Man was omniscient as God, and ignorant as Man. This, no doubt, is true, though it cannot be imagined. Nor indeed can the unconsciousness of Christ in sleep be imagined, nor the twilight of reason in his infancy; still less his merely organic life in his mother's womb. But the physical sciences, no less than theology, propose for our belief much that cannot be imagined.

Full text of "The World S Last Night And Other Essays"

 

[Johann!@#]

Thank you, sir.

Found a PDF. The context states the following, and He raises an interesting question. I will quote the passage first:

"Say what you like" we shall be told, "the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false. 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."

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. Unless the reporter were perfectly honest 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, then, are these: that Jesus professed himself (in some sense) ignorant, and within a moment showed that he really was so. To believe in the Incarnation, to believe that he is God, makes it hard to understand how he could be ignorant; but also makes it certain that, if he said he could be ignorant, then ignorant he could really be. For a God who can be ignorant is less baffling than a God who falsely professes ignorance. The answer of theologians is that the God-Man was omniscient as God, and ignorant as Man. This, no doubt, is true, though it cannot be imagined. Nor indeed can the unconsciousness of Christ in sleep be imagined, nor the twilight of reason in his infancy; still less his merely organic life in his mother's womb. But the physical sciences, no less than theology, propose for our belief much that cannot be imagined.

Full text of "The World S Last Night And Other Essays"

Thank you brother.

J.

 

[NewLifeInChrist]

Last year, a thread was created which declared Jesus to essentially be a false prophet. The posts stated:

"I am skeptical about Jesus being who he claimed to be (I'm not a Christian btw)... 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." Moses words in Deuteronomy 18:21-22 state, “But you may wonder, ‘How will we know whether or not a prophecy is from the Lord?’ If the prophet speaks in the Lord’s name but his prediction does not happen or come true, you will know that the Lord did not give that message. That prophet has spoken without my authority and need not be feared." Surely, either Jesus' prophecy is truthful or he is made a false prophet by Moses' words?

The actual verse in question is this: "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." (Matthew 24:34)

The above mentioned thread was shut down since non-Christians are no longer allowed to post except in Questions and Answers, but to answer his "dilemma" here, it is simply this: The common translation of γενεὰ in the expression "οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη" using the word "generation" is actually in error. γενεὰ was used of an "age" as well, and that is what the Lord was referring to here. He was saying "This age - i.e. the church age, prior to the millennium - will not pass away until all these things are fulfilled."

Did the apostles interpret Him to mean He was returning in their time? Yes, it appears they did. But our Lord knew what He was saying, and warned them in that very same Chapter NOT to get lackadaisical, should He not return right away, lest they began to spiritually abuse His people. He was signaling He was well aware His return would not be soon, though it may have been to their benefit to believe it was.

44 Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. 45 "Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his master made ruler over his household, to give them food in due season? 46 Blessed is that servant whom his master, when he comes, will find so doing. 47 Assuredly, I say to you that he will make him ruler over all his goods. 48 But if that evil servant says in his heart, 'My master is delaying his coming,' 49 and begins to beat his fellow servants, and to eat and drink with the drunkards, 50 the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him and at an hour that he is not aware of, 51 and will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 24:44-51)

Any other responses to the argument raised by the non-Christian are welcome. I am simply presenting mine.

Blessings in Christ,
Hidden In Him

I was taught that "this generation" is referring to the generation that sees "all these things" (vs 33). And "these things" are the things mentioned by Jesus about the signs that would preceed His second coming, which was a question from his disciples in Matthew 24:3. This interpretation is not dispositive, but it makes sense to me.

 

[JLB]

Last year, a thread was created which declared Jesus to essentially be a false prophet. The posts stated:

"I am skeptical about Jesus being who he claimed to be (I'm not a Christian btw)... 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." Moses words in Deuteronomy 18:21-22 state, “But you may wonder, ‘How will we know whether or not a prophecy is from the Lord?’ If the prophet speaks in the Lord’s name but his prediction does not happen or come true, you will know that the Lord did not give that message. That prophet has spoken without my authority and need not be feared." Surely, either Jesus' prophecy is truthful or he is made a false prophet by Moses' words?

The actual verse in question is this: "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened." (Matthew 24:34)

The above mentioned thread was shut down since non-Christians are no longer allowed to post except in Questions and Answers, but to answer his "dilemma" here, it is simply this: The common translation of γενεὰ in the expression "οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη" using the word "generation" is actually in error. γενεὰ was used of an "age" as well, and that is what the Lord was referring to here. He was saying "This age - i.e. the church age, prior to the millennium - will not pass away until all these things are fulfilled."

Did the apostles interpret Him to mean He was returning in their time? Yes, it appears they did. But our Lord knew what He was saying, and warned them in that very same Chapter NOT to get lackadaisical, should He not return right away, lest they began to spiritually abuse His people. He was signaling He was well aware His return would not be soon, though it may have been to their benefit to believe it was.

44 Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. 45 "Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his master made ruler over his household, to give them food in due season? 46 Blessed is that servant whom his master, when he comes, will find so doing. 47 Assuredly, I say to you that he will make him ruler over all his goods. 48 But if that evil servant says in his heart, 'My master is delaying his coming,' 49 and begins to beat his fellow servants, and to eat and drink with the drunkards, 50 the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him and at an hour that he is not aware of, 51 and will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew 24:44-51)

Any other responses to the argument raised by the non-Christian are welcome. I am simply presenting mine.

Blessings in Christ,
Hidden In Him

“Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away. Matthew 24:32-35

• this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.

The generation that “sees these things” will by no means pass away.
The context of this sermon is founded upon the question….
Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” Matthew 24:3
Jesus spent Matthew 24-25 answering this question.
So contextually speaking “this generation” refers to the generation that “sees these things” and is the generation that will witness His coming and the end of the age.
Preterist’s love take this this scripture as their “proof text” for establishing their doctrine while ignoring the contextual framework that Jesus so carefully laid out.


I think we all agree that Jesus is speaking prophetically and as He is speaking He is also “seeing” the things He is speaking about. In other words He is “there” in real time as well as there with His disciples, so to Him, (or anyone who operates in visions and prophetically) He is speaking in the moment to the Church; to those to whom it applies.

• and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

• So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near—at the doors! Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.

 

[Johann!@#]

I was taught that "this generation" is referring to the generation that sees "all these things" (vs 33). And "these things" are the things mentioned by Jesus about the signs that would preceed His second coming, which was a question from his disciples in Matthew 24:3. This interpretation is not dispositive, but it makes sense to me.

Something to consider--if "generation" is an "age"

New Testament Considerations

Matthew 24:34 – “This generation shall not pass away until all these things are fulfilled.”

If taken strictly temporally, this would imply that the Second Coming, cosmic signs, and final judgment must have occurred within ~40 years.

But Jesus' prophecy spans far more than the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (though partial fulfillment is often proposed there).

Alternative Interpretations:

"This generation" as a type: i.e., the unbelieving, adulterous generation mentioned throughout the Gospels (cf. Matthew 12:39; 16:4). This generation-marked by rebellion--remains until Christ returns.

"This generation" as the age of the Church: Some early interpreters (especially post-Destruction) viewed the “generation” as referring to the Church age prior to the parousia.


24:34 This verse referred to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 by the Roman legions, some from across the Euphrates, under Titus. Jesus was addressing the questions of Matt. 24:3. See note at Contextual Insights, B.

Many Futurists have tried to make "this generation" refer to a far off generation, but how would Jesus' predictions make any sense to them?
Jesus is referring to those Jewish leaders and people of Judah who heard Him, saw His miracles, and still rejected Him. He will reject them in His temporal judgment on Jerusalem and the temple within 40 years (i.e., a biblical generation).

Just read Matt. 11:16; 12:39,41,42,45; 16:4; 17:17; 23:36; 24:34. Jesus' time markers (i.e., there are several terms and phrases used repeatedly) are crucial in interpreting the Olivet Discourse!

Remember, Matthew 23-25 form a literary unit (i.e., dealing with the same subject).

For a good brief discussion of "this generation will not pass away," see Hard Sayings of the Bible, pp. 445-448.

Matthew Chapter 24

God bless.

J.

 

[WIP]

Let's remember to keep the focus on the OP's (Hidden in Him) questions in this thread. If you wish to have a more open discussion, please start a new thread in another forum. Thanks.

 

[RandyK]

I would be remiss in my duties as student of biblical prophecy if I didn't give my very unpopular position. ;) I find that a good number of scholars, whether Lewis or Schweitzer can be wrong on the Olivet Discourse and on Jesus' view of the timing of his Coming.

Though Jesus made the day and hour of his Coming ambiguous or unknowable, he did *not* make recognition of its nearness impossible. On the contrary, Jesus gave clear signs to indicate *when* in a general sense it is to develop and take place.

In sum, Jerusalem would fall "in this generation," ie in the generation that the temple is destroyed by the Roman Army, which would then lead to an age-long Jewish Diaspora. In this time Christians would at times be rejected or persecuted.

Then, as the Roman Empire disintegrates and reassembles into an Antichristian Empire, we can expect the Antichrist himself to rise and reign for only approx. 3.5 years. Once the 1260 days is finished, the 2 Witnesses will die and be resurrected. Then, after an unspecified, unknowable period of time there will be a great assemblage of armies from the East, which will require a lengthy mobilization I should think?

After this, Armageddon will take place, and within the hour--probably a nuclear event, Christ will return. By then we will know the hour of Christ's return--we just won't know it until it actually happens!

Jesus gave a couple of parables that indicated, symbolically, that his Return would be after a "long time." So he was not suggesting an immediate coming of the Kingdom. The Disciples did at times expect a more imminent coming of God's Kingdom, just as the Jews generally did. But that expectation was proven by Jesus to be false.

Luke 19.While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once.

Jesus indicated not that we can't tell the prophetic time in our day, but that our focus should more importantly be on our current mission and ministry, or on the moral/spiritual example we set in our own culture and generation.

Acts 1.6 Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
7 He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

The pattern set in Dan 9 indicates that the Messiah is cut off, followed by the fall of "the city and the sanctuary." This is accomplished, according to vss. 26 and 27, by the people of the prince to come, which I believe to be the Roman Army Luke describes as setting a siege against Jerusalem. Both Dan 9.27 and Mat 24/Mar 13 call it the "Abomination of Desolation."

This indicated to Jesus that it would be after he is "cut off" that the city would be destroyed, and the sanctuary desolated, in his generation. Within 40 years of his death Jerusalem fell to the Romans (70 AD). This showed God's patience with the Jews to wait 40 years after the Jews crucified their Messiah, and yet it was still within a generation, as Jesus prophesied.

Though this is my view, it is also largely the view of the majority of the early Church Fathers. So I'm not being "original" here! It just isn't a popular position among Futurists, though I consider myself a Futurist, as well.

Futurists typically view Daniel's "70th Week" and the "Abomination of Desolation" as future prophecies yet to be fulfilled. Only a couple of ancient Church Fathers viewed things this way, among them Irenaeus and Hippolytus, his disciple.

Futurists in our day exist as such because they believe in the future salvation of national Israel, as well as in a future Antichrist and in a literal Millennium. I agree with that, but do not then assign "future prophecy" to all of the prophecies of Daniel and Jesus.

 

[JLB]

But Jesus' prophecy spans far more than the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (though partial fulfillment is often proposed there).

The armies surrounding Jerusalem refer to the final days just before His return.

As the Spirit of Christ spoke through the prophet Zechariah -

These events are seen in the Olivet Discourse.


Behold, the day of the LORD is coming,
And your spoil will be divided in your midst.
For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem;
The city shall be taken,
The houses rifled,
And the women ravished.
Half of the city shall go into captivity,
But the remnant of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
Then the LORD will go forth
And fight against those nations,
As He fights in the day of battle.
And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives,
Which faces Jerusalem on the east.
And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two,
From east to west,
Making a very large valley;
Half of the mountain shall move toward the north
And half of it toward the south.
Then you shall flee through My mountain valley,
For the mountain valley shall reach to Azal.
Yes, you shall flee
As you fled from the earthquake
In the days of Uzziah king of Judah.
Thus the LORD my God will come,
And all the saints with You.
It shall come to pass in that day
That there will be no light;
The lights will diminish.
It shall be one day
Which is known to the LORD—
Neither day nor night.
But at evening time it shall happen
That it will be light.
Zechariah 14:1-7

 

[JLB]

Futurists typically view Daniel's "70th Week" and the "Abomination of Desolation" as future prophecies yet to be fulfilled.

And how about you do you believe the 70th week has already been fulfilled?

 

[RandyK]

And how about you do you believe the 70th week has already been fulfilled?

Hi JLB.
A very long time ago I was a staunch supporter and promoter of the idea that the last half of the "70th Week" is future and is synonymous with the 3.5 years of Antichrist's Reign. I gave up that position because the argument against it was too strong to resist.

I was told that the 70th Week would make no sense if it is disconnected from the previous 69 Weeks by any period of time, let alone for 2 millennia! The minute you separate the 70th Week from the preceding 69th Week they cease to be part of the same time frame and specified period of fulfillment.

After all, if you say I'll be home in 10 minutes, and show up 10 years later, you cannot say that you actually did come home in 10 minutes--it's just that the 9th minute and the 10th minute were separated by 10 years! ;)

So I gave up on that misinterpretation, being irrational, and eventually settled on the view of the Church Fathers, which is that the 70th Week was the final Week of a 70 Week period. But in the end the 70th Week and completion of this period was confirmed by a Roman ruler, who terminates Temple Worship. He terminated "sacrifice and offering," and in doing so, confirmed the Messianic covenant sealed by his blood.

After all, the background to this prophecy was all about the Temple's restoration and its future. In the 1st 7 Weeks the Temple is rebuilt, and then for another 62 Weeks it stands until the Messiah is cut off, followed by the destruction of that Temple in his generation. This is precisely what Jesus predicted in his Olivet Discourse--Luke is the most graphic in this.

The final Week was therefore ended when Christ was cut off, which was to be followed by the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem. That is what happened, and that is what the Church Fathers believed. So do I.