Has anyone considered the possibility that systematic Theology and scriptural escatology are inconsistent because some canonical authors wrongly reported things they didn't understand concerning future events beyond their ability to accurately predict? 1 Cor.13:9-10. I think we can all agree that 'The Perfect' has not yet come, so the imperfect must be with us still. There is every reason to believe that The Bible accurately offers information concerning salvation and all the supporting salvific evidence necessary for salvation through 'saving faith', along with the support of The Spirit of Christ which is The Holy Spirit, to enable effective discipleship. I don't see that God is under any obligation however to reveal future events to readers of The Bible, any more than God saw fit to reveal the temporal details concerning the second coming, even to Christ Himself when he was a mortal on earth. Matt.24:36. And it is hair splitting to try to suggest that though the day, hour or minute can't be known, the month or year might be guessable by those who sort through the possibly contradictory predictions sprinkled throughout the scriptures by various 'inspired guessers' of the future. .
I find your reasoning and writing to be quite confusing and misleading. On the subject of Christ's return, I responded to what you wrote: I did reject that a First Century Parousia took place, and then you proceeded to cite scriptures 'proving' that Christ returned in the First Century. But you mix your apples with your bananas, because the parousia you referred to along was not a Second Coming but was Christ's rising from the dead! He never left earth, for His body was in the grave, and the parousia you mention was not a return to earth (anticipated by Paul) but a return from death to life (which was in Paul's past). There was no First Century Parousia in the sense of a future return that Paul was thinking of! The references to Christ's return, that we find in any of Paul's letters, all are to a future event. A future event that still has not happened as of this very moment. Likewise in Matthew's Gospel, when Jesus was asked about His future return: Mat 24:3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? Notice that Jesus' return is associated with "the end of the world" (or more precisely, aion, the end of the age). Jesus answered that there would be false Christs, wars, pestilences, etc, etc. No way could all this have taken place between the time Christ died and the time he rose from the dead. Jesus was telling them of events which would take place well into the future. You recited all those scriptures, but none of them prove your claim that Jesus returned in the First Century. Many of those scriptures were indeed applicable to Christ's post-resurrection appearance. Be that as it may, what Paul thought the timeline would look like does not control what God will do; I already commented previously that Paul believed the 2nd. Advent would occur very soon, but obviously he guessed wrong.
tstor can I repeat my question? All these statements say the, kingdom of God, son of man etc will happen shortly. Where does the Bible say it did happen? And if the Bible doesn't actually say it did happen due to it maybe being outside the writers period, when do you think it happened? A rough year or so.
Let's back up to the statement you made, to which I responded, to which you wrote the above. By way of clarification, I agree that God loves the Jewish people who accept Christ. But I disagree that an unbelieving Jew is no different than an unbelieving gentile, because God never made a covenant with the gentiles per se, whereas He did make a covenant with Abraham concerning his offspring through Isaac (Romans 9:6-8 specifically lets out the offspring of Abraham via Hagar). Unbelieving Jews are not "children of God" as all believers are. Yet they are still particularly beloved by God, and He is not finished blessing them because of the covenant promises He made to Abraham and to Jacob (Israel). Verses 6 through 8 were not meant to create a new, novel definition of "Israel." Consider what Paul wrote just a few verses earlier: Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Rom 9:4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Israelites are still the ethnic descendants of Jacob. Jerem. 31:31-37 conveys God's promise that only when the sun, moon and stars pass away will the seed of Israel... cease from being a nation before me and will He cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done. The descendants of Jacob are still special in God's sight. He will not be finished with them until He destroys the present heavens & earth and creates new ones (Rev. 21:1 prophesies that God will do this). God has not replaced ethnic Israel (the seed of Jacob) with spiritual Israel. In fact, He said that He will not make an end of ethnic Israel. Jer 30:10 Therefore fear thou not, O my servant Jacob, saith the LORD; neither be dismayed, O Israel: for, lo, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid. Jer 30:11 For I am with thee, saith the LORD, to save thee: though I make a full end of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full end of thee: but I will correct thee in measure, and will not leave thee altogether unpunished. Supersessionism supposes that ethnic Israel has no advantage over ethnic gentiles, that they are the same in God's eyes. Yet Paul wrote: Rom 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. Rom 3:3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar...
Admittedly, this post is quite difficult to decipher. It would be helpful for me if you pointed out the particular passages that you believe to be objectionable and provide some comments for each. I don't think Paul was mistaken. That is where we differ. If he "guessed wrong," it is only because Jesus gave rotten advice. The Olivet Discourse doesn't distinguish between the destruction of the Temple and Jesus' return. It isn't referring to (as I think you are saying) Jesus' resurrection from the dead. I believe all of the NT was written prior to it happening. It happened in 70 AD with the destruction of the Temple. Jesus told us that is when it would happen. Jesus starts by telling of the destruction of the Temple, then proceeds to describe the tribulation, and then he will return (Matthew 24:1-33). He then gives the timeline (v. 34). This is the consistent testimony of the Scriptures. Interpreting the prophetic language, while challenging, certainly becomes easier once it is recognized that it already happened.
St Paul may disagree with you. 1 Cor.13:8-10. I don't find that notion in scripture: Jesus didn't give rotten advice, but disciples frequently didn't understand him. John 12:16. Luke 18:34. Can you be sure of that? There were certainly many who heard his discourse that witnessed his apprearances after the resurrection and surely that was evidence that The Kingdom had come in Power. This prophesy was therefore fulfilled. It could easily be referring to both as events proving the Kingdom had come in power and had indeed been witnessed by some standing there listening to his words. What are you saying is 'it' that happened before the New Testament was written? Some of the New Testament was probably not completed until between 81 to 110, these being Jude and Revelation, though some passages in Revelation may have been written earlier with material included from the reigns of Nero and Vespasian. The most reasonable suggestion is the Reign of Domitian 81-96. The date for Timothy could be as late as 100-120. .
That covenant has come to an end, which I already detailed in another post (#67). Your reading of Romans 9 appears to miss the point. Paul tells us that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God. The children of the promise are the ones counted as offspring. That is why God loved Jacob but hated Esau. For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression. That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring—not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. (Romans 4:13-17) God does not have two sets of people in the Church and Israel. They are one and the same. There is one flock. There is one shepherd. Unbelieving Jews have been broken off. Jesus tells us "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" (John 14:6). Unbelieving Jews do not believe in Jesus and, therefore, have not come to the Father. The Jews broke the covenant with God. It was conditioned on their obedience. The Old has passed away and the New has come into being (#67). Yes. There are still believing ethnic Jews in existence. Why does Paul say he has "great sorrow and unceasing anguish" in his heart (v. 1)? He tells us: What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. (Romans 9:30-32) Paul desires that his kinsmen should come to the faith of Abraham because that is the only way they will be saved. God hasn't made a full end of ethnic Israel. There are ethnic Israelites in the Church today. They are of God because of their faith, not because of their flesh. Regarding Revelation 21:1, why would God destroy heaven, a metaphysical place? Why would God destroy the created order when it is said "God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good" (Genesis 1:31)? Reading apocalyptic language too literally often makes little sense. Paul concludes chapter 2 with this: For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God. (Romans 2:28-29) This is consistent with the rest of his discussions about what it means to be of God's people. What is the advantage of the Jew? They were "entrusted with the oracles of God." This is no small thing, to be sure. The Gentiles did not have any such advantage. Some (i.e., the hardened) were not faithful. Does that mean God is made unfaithful by their faithlessness? "By no means!" God is faithful to His people regardless of the hardened Israelites. His righteousness and faithfulness prevail. That is why Paul handles this objection: But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? (I speak in a human way.) By no means! For then how could God judge the world? (Romans 3:5-6) Faithless (unrighteous) Jews will be judged. God will inflict his wrath upon them. Their circumcision in the flesh amounts to nothing if they don't have faith. No. What is Paul talking about in this passage? 1 Corinthians is largely about spiritual gifts, one of which is prophecy. It will pass away, just as the other gifts (e.g., tongues) will also pass away. These gifts will pass away "when the perfect comes." This already happened. Jesus already returned which is why the spiritual gifts have passed away. However, love is forever. If Jesus didn't give rotten advice, then tell me when the things described in the Olivet Discourse happened or will happen. If your answer falls outside of "this generation," you may need to reexamine your view of prophecy. You would need to show that the tribulation and destruction of the Temple happened within the three days. I think you'd have a tough time of that. I reject those dates, as do many others. From a Christian perspective, all of these things had to have been written prior to 70 AD because the Jewish-Roman War is the only event within the timeline provided by Jesus that checks all the boxes. Revelation was written to real churches with real people. There is imminency expressed throughout the writing. If it was written after 70 AD, then it is failed prophecy and not inspired.
What did Jesus mean when he declared himself 'The Way'? He might have meant that HE is the means by which we access God for Salvation. Through an 'I - Thou' relationship, no longer through an 'I - It' objectivity by mere obedience to God's impersonal Law. Thus Christ may quite likely have been implying that it was through seeking and maintaining "Relationship" with him as integral within the Triune Godhead that we come to the Father, not by merely calling ourselves a "Christian" and submitting to baptism in the name of Jesus. Anyone can pretend to do that and many were falsely forced, (between 1930-45) under duress, to make such a declaration. "Relationship" is a two way affair and not a matter of mere religious affiliation. What did Jesus mean when he declared himself 'The Truth'? He might have meant that anyone, of any 'religion' who honours and seeks the truth rather than deliberately distorting, subverting and suppressing it, comes to the Father 'Through the Truth' which is in fact a channel to God through Christ, who IS The Truth. What did Jesus mean when he declared himself to 'The Life'? He may have meant something like this: Prov. 8:1-2, Prov. 8:22 See the footnte (a) Prov. 8:5-10. particularly verse 7. Prov. 8:34-36. verse 35 seems relevent. Bear it in mind that Jesus had probably committed this to memory, it being a Key wisdom passage speaking specifically of Him. Luke 24:27. Not what you may be unwittingly suggesting, that Jesus Christ was barring the way to Salvation to all but those who have sworn allegiance to an organisation and a religious philosophy supposedly representing Him and purporting to unfailingly do Christ's will upon earth. I think his message here was far more universal and much less sectarian than you are suggesting. .
I absolutely agree with all of this. Although... Yes, I agree with this as well. Christ and His teachings are the truth. As such, we must recognize Christ as the way. Hm, perhaps you've misunderstood me (or I haven't been clear on this point). I am not sectarian. I don't think someone needs to be an Anglican to be saved, for example. In fact, there are certainly many Anglicans who are not saved. Jesus doesn't reside within the confines of any particular denomination or sect (that is typically a cult belief). Someone can have a true and saving faith outside of an earthly organization.
You must belong to a severely spiritually ungifted congregation then. I can't imagine what that could be like and neither I guess would Rexlion. Can you be sure of that? There were certainly many who heard his discourse that witnessed his appearances after the resurrection and surely that was evidence that The Kingdom had come in Power. This prophesy was therefore fulfilled. It could easily be referring to both as events proving the Kingdom had come in power and had indeed been witnessed by some standing there listening to his words. Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. Matt.24:4 "Do not be deceived". This is the reason for Christ's statements following on, not information to satisfy idle curiosity or upon which to predict the end of the world. The end is not yet, just the beginning of sorrows. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. The world was a very much bigger place than they thought it was in those days. The Australian Aborigines, South American Indians, North American Indians, most of the Chinese and Japanese didn't hear the Gospel for tens of hundreds of years after that was written down. Verse 15 is talking about the destruction of The Temple and Jerusalem. It does not necessarily come chronologically in sequence after what Christ was outlining in the previous verses. It is a separate trend of thought, a new subject. Verse 21. Not THE great tribulation, just great tribulation. Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together. Immediately after the tribulation of those days - i.e. The days when the sign of the Son of Man shall appear, as lightning which can be clearly seen from a distance, so don't expect the parousia to be a hole in the corner affair that nobody ever knew actually happened. If/when, it happens EVERYONE on earth will know about it. shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. It is quite possible that Christ is talking to and about the future generation which will experience the perusia. He knew his words to be lasting long enough to reach that generation over the vast expanse of time. i.e The Generation that shall actually have witnessed all these things, many of which have not yet come to pass. Do you suppose Jesus and Matthew were completely unaware that their words would speak to many generations of believers. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. I anticipated that. What a cynic I must be. Depends on how long it took to get them published I suppose. Some folks are still waiting for their publishers to release their books. I don't think either the books of Jude or Timothy actually make any predictions. Revelation does though, but it is by no means certain that its primary intention was to inform its readership of what was to come per se. Rather to encourage them during what they were actually suffering at the time. The author, after all, had been persecuted by being stranded on Patmos to shut him up and he wrote to real churches with real problems presumably to encourage them, not to put the fear of the living God into them. (Well most of them, he maybe wanted to shake Pergumum, Thyatira and Sardis up a bit before they completely went to the dogs). .
Would you make God a liar? His covenant with the circumcised offspring of Abraham is everlasting. This everlasting covenant has not ended so long as the Israelis continue circumcision as the sign that they align themselves under God's covenant. Gen 17:3 And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying, Gen 17:4 As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Gen 17:5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee. Gen 17:6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. Gen 17:7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. Gen 17:8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. Gen 17:9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. Gen 17:10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. Gen 17:11 And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you. Gen 17:12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. Gen 17:13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. Gen 17:14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant. The continuation of the everlasting covenant makes a world of difference. To those who think the covenant has "come to an end," the nation of Israel is an illegitimate interloper in the Middle East. To those who recognize the truth of God's word (and God is not a man that can lie, nor does He break promises, for even when men are unfaithful God remains faithful), the reborn nation of Israel is a sign of God's mighty hand and an opportunity to align ourselves with God's will for His still-loved people of Israel (for He promises to bless those who bless Israel and to curse those who curse Israel). Gen 12:2-3 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. Gen 22:16-18 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice. God swore that Abraham's descendants, through Isaac & Jacob in particular, would have a special place in His plans because of Abraham's faith and obedience. This was a foreshadowing of the faithful, obedient offering Jesus would make of His own mortal life, by which God has given us (believers/disciples) a special place in His plans. God could no more turn His back on Israel or violate the oaths He swore on their behalf than He could abandon us, His children. Isa 41:8 But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend. Isa 41:9 Thou whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called thee from the chief men thereof, and said unto thee, Thou art my servant; I have chosen thee, and not cast thee away. Isa 41:10 Fear thou not; for I am with thee: be not dismayed; for I am thy God: I will strengthen thee; yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness. Isa 41:11 Behold, all they that were incensed against thee shall be ashamed and confounded: they shall be as nothing; and they that strive with thee shall perish. Isa 41:12 Thou shalt seek them, and shalt not find them, even them that contended with thee: they that war against thee shall be as nothing, and as a thing of nought. Isa 41:13 For I the LORD thy God will hold thy right hand, saying unto thee, Fear not; I will help thee. God says that He "will not cast thee (Israel) away." Does this sound like a promise that God will disavow or break? Isa 43:21 This people have I formed for myself... Hos 14:4 I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely: for mine anger is turned away from him. Hos 14:5 I will be as the dew unto Israel: he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his roots as Lebanon. Deut 7:6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. (The word "holy" here means "set apart.") Anyone who has read the entire Old Testament is likely to have a vastly different perspective (compared to one who has only read small portions of it) of the depth of love and concern God has for Israel. If anyone has not yet set themselves a reading plan and a goal to read through all of the O.T., I heartily recommend it. Far from obsolete, the O.T. contains valuable lessons that would do much good in this day and age if everyone on earth were to learn them; humanity today is making some of the same dumb mistakes that Israel made 3,000+ years ago (and those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it). Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that this is a covenant of eternal salvation by dint of lineage. Nor am I saying that unredeemed Israelis are 'children' of God by heritage. But they are still people chosen by God (in a way unlike any unredeemed gentile), people whom He loves, people to whom He has given unbreakable oaths and enduring promises. You may find this brief webpage worth reading: https://biblical-christianity.com/gods-unconditional-promise-to-israel
It's very important to address this issue. Jesus has not "already returned." Jesus rose from the dead, but He was still in the earth until then. When someone has not departed the earth, they cannot "return" to earth. Moreover, every reference in the Bible to Jesus' return indicates an event following His ascension. This has not happened yet. What will be the conditions of Jesus' return to earth, of His 2nd. advent? 1. He will return to earth from the clouds in the atmosphere. Act 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. Act 1:10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Act 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. 2. His return will be visible and well-seen by multitudes. Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. Jesus said so Himself! Mat 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. Mat 24:28 For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together. Mat 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: Mat 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 3. His return will be so powerful, it will split a mountain in two! Zec 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south. I ask anyone who claims that Jesus has returned: does the alleged return fit these descriptions and meet these conditions? If not, it doesn't qualify as a "return" of Christ.
This was already fulfilled in the first century (see post #46). Jesus says "this generation," not "that generation." The disciples asked "when will these things be" (v. 3). If Jesus' answer was "that generation in the indefinite future," did he really give them any sort of answer at all? @Rexlion, I believe that our discussion on ethnic Israel isn't very fruitful in the sense that men who are much more knowledgeable than us have already published tons on this very subject. As well, our discussion on preterism (which I think is fruitful as this dialog needs to happen) is being congested by focussing on the apocalyptic language. I will let the imminency interpret the prophecies. I have made my case for that. Either way, I don't want this to become more heat than light. I consider both you and @Tiffy to be brothers in the utmost sense! I think we all agree on the nature of the Godhead, Christology, and the Gospel message. We all believe in the resurrection hope for believers.
I really don't know how anyone can maintain that the gospel was preached to the entire world in the First Century. Tiffy has explained the obvious reason why it can't be so. Continuing to allege something in the face of plain facts leaves us with nowhere to go in the discussion. And preterism is absurd on its face; an objective person can easily find a large number of prophecies that have not come to pass. This is fruitless. I'm out.
An interesting argument at #46 if you enjoy Literalist Bible inerancy gymnastics. Triple back somersaults on the bar have got nothing on this spectacular display of geographically inept, Bible 'proofs'. Barnham and Bailey eat your heart out. I suppose Australia and the entire continent of the Americas actually didn't exist and had no populations when your quotations were written or was that where Paul went during his mystery period before his death, (not just Spain). .
How am I the literalist in this situation? Again, audience matters. Jesus said in Matthew 13:32 that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds. Of course, that isn't literally true. He is speaking to his audience. The mustard seed, in their view, was the smallest of all seeds. The ancient world didn't know about Australia, the Americas, etc. because they had no conception of those places. To read your understanding of geography into the text will lead to errors.
I reluctantly enter this conversation to ask more about this. As we know, Jesus was not speaking English, so, what were his actual words in the Scripture?
It is not me that is reading into the text that the world actually only consisted of The world known to the Romans. In fact even the Romans knew there was more world than they had so far included in their empire, they just didn't know exactly how much of it there was that they had not yet included. You surely are not seriously suggesting that Autralian Aborigines and North and South American Native Nations had received the Gospel because the Bible says the whole world had heard it preached by 70 AD. There was no TV or Radio then, only word of mouth and written word. There is some evidence that The New World may have been known to some African and European peoples, but it is obvious that when the Bible contains references to the whole world it clearly does not mean the geographical extent that we now understand that expression to mean. On the other hand, unless Jesus had some other reason for saying 'My words shall never pass away'', it seems logical to assume that he could foresee that delivering the Gospel Message to the whole world would take some time by word of mouth, probably somewhat more than a mere 40 years. The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. Ps.19:1-4. This shall surely come to pass, but it does not suggest that it has already happened in any physical or literal way.
I'm definitely not a Greek scholar, but I'm not aware of any variation in how this verse is translated. As I understand it, all other instances of this expression within the four Gospels refer to the present generation, i.e., this generation (Matthew 11:16; 12:41–42, 45; 23:36; 24:34; Mark 8:12, 38; 13:30; Luke 7:31; 11:29–32, 50–51; 17:25; 21:32). Yes, there was some fuzzy notion of land (and perhaps peoples) beyond the Roman world. That doesn't really change anything. The NT writers clearly thought they had proclaimed the Gospel to the whole world. Their understanding of the world was the Roman world, not our modern world. I'm not of the mind that the Bible was written to us. You're infusing yourself into the text. No, I am not suggesting the Aboriginals and Natives had received the Gospel in the first century. I am suggesting that they weren't in view. The Kingdom of God is eternal. The New Covenant is eternal. As you stated, Jesus' words shall never pass away. While everything was fulfilled in the first century, we are still here on earth to proclaim the Gospel and increase the Kingdom of God. As it says in Isaiah 9:7, "the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end."