Expert: Edward Bode - 11/23/2006

Question
Last sundays gospel. Jesus tells the disciples that the end of the world will be within this generation. Clearly this didn't happen. If this is His humanity speaking and this is an error, how does one react to other statements which could equally be human in origin eg. "this is my Body"
In the same gospel He tells the apostles that only the father knows the time of the end. Surely as the second person of the Trinity He must also know or is this another of the human expressions. We have the same statement at the time of His ascension . Human again ?. Questionable in this case since He is no longer human.

Every Sunday we stand for the Gospel and hear the lector say
"This is the word of God"
When I was a boy the Protestant Kids went to Bible class on Sundays. We were not encouraged to read the bible because its interpretation was difficult. I can see why since it is a veritable minefield. Literal truths intermingled with obviously non factual accounts. The problem is sorting the wheat from the chaff. Your comments please.


Answer
General comment:  God, Who "can neither deceive nor be deceived", has revealed His message for the salvation of humanity through two complementary and non-contradictory sources -- written [scripture/bible] and oral [tradition].  Many mysteries remain to the human mind.  
The bible is a library of books and contains many types [styles]of writings, for example, history, parables, songs, prayers, letters. Understanding the message of the ancient bible requires knowing the type of writing and examining all the relevant verses.  Some passages are difficult to understand.
Jesus, "true God and true man", had divine and human knowledge.
Specific comments:
The Eucharist -- The key passage is John chapter6 where Jesus insists on a literal understanding of his flesh and blood being truly present in the Eurcharist despite the problem of such an understanding for many listeners.  Note that when Jesus spoke figuratively to Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman [John chapters 3 and 4]and they understood him literally, Jesus clearly explained the manner in which he was speaking.  He made no such correction about the Eucharist.
Mark chapter 13 is difficult to understand. It contains  figurative apocalyptic and seems to be a composite with the final verses strung together on the basis of repeated words [for example, "these things", "pass away"].  So, to what does the vague "these things" [verse 29 and 30]of the parable refer?  Some would see the answer to verse 4 about the destruction of the temple.
The question about Jesus' not knowing the time of the second coming [Old Testament: Day of Jahweh]garnered much attention in the fourth century when the Arians, who denied the divinity of Christ, used it as an argument.  However, the Church defended and defined the divinity of Christ.  Note that the parallel verses in Matthew and Luke differ somewhat from Mark.  Some theologians have offered as an explantion: Jesus spoke of his not knowing because the time of the second coming was not part of his mission.  The Old Testament "Day of Jahweh" was reserved to God alone.  
I hope that my incomplete comments might give you some insight to your concerns about understanding the profession of the Church about the reality of the Eucharist and of the divinity of Christ.  
If you would like further comments from me, I would be pleased to respond to them.
Best wishes, Russell.