There are many apologetics for the the fact that the Second Coming didn't happen within Jesus' generation. The Presbyterian line when I was growing up was that by the Second Coming or Kingdom of God referred to in the synoptic gospels was merely death and resurrection. Though how you can have resurrection without "tasting death" is beyond me. The wandering Jew was the favorite during the Middle Ages, though that didn't stop them from expecting the Second Coming in the year 1000 because it was such a lovely round number. The idea that Jesus meant some other generation then the one he was talking to has been around awhile too. I don't find any of them plausible. They all require stretching the bejesus out of the language or just plain inventing something like the wandering Jew (the plant makes great ground-cover).
Frankly, I don't think anyone reading the New Testament without knowing anything about modern Christianity would infer a religion remotely like modern Christianity. The apologists have rewritten the whole thing.
Frankly, I don't think anyone reading the New Testament without knowing anything about modern Christianity would infer a religion remotely like modern Christianity. The apologists have rewritten the whole thing.
If there is a god, I want to believe that there is a god. If there is not a god, I want to believe that there is no god.
