In modern culture, it's often asserted the apocalypse has occurred any time someone doesn't get their way.
The verse where he tells his disciples that “this generation will not pass away until all these things take place” would seem to be at odds with that. A lot of Biblical canon is at odds with itself, the Bible doesn't have a singular coherent narrative. I'm just suggesting an interpretation which seems more likely than not.
Just look at history - almost every generation of Christians have believed the end times would occur within their lifetimes, or at least the near future. Why would only the first generation accept that, no, it would be some thousands of thousands of years in the future? That isn't the way these things tend to work.
I think thats close to a definition of insanity. Either move to the Aramaic, or Greek, or stop discussing the "literalism" of the words in question.
But fine. Since you brought it up, and since you bring up a fair point tell us your interpretation of the original Aramaic or Greek.
Because your reply presupposes the modern understanding is inherently sound because of an appeal to authority of the wisdom of times past. I would say instead by the time of the council of Nicea, things were already very political and the church was seeking to confirm words to suit the institution, not for their actual historical meaning. That was only 2-300 years after the record mind you.
There is quite the extensive record of first/second century apocalyptic literature, (some of it even became the NT). These preserve remarkably detailed pictures of what apocalyptic thinking looked like long before Nicea.
The main thing to say is the concept of apocalypse was much broader than today's. To your question, it did mean a revelation of relationship with god, and then it also meant an end-of-times sense, and it also was political commentary, and it was also a conspiracy theory, etc. People did not distinguish between which modern, narrower concept they meant, because they actually meant the broad concept.
Christians have a wide range of views on eschatology, but the mainstream position for a while has been amillennial, which are not the people who get freaked out about locusts and red cows and whatnot.
The way it came to be interpreted by the church is not necessarily the way it was meant to be interpreted by first generation Christians, so its presence in canon isn't evidence of any particular intent on the part of the author.
I don't even know what to say. For the first thousand years or so, they didn't even teach their own scriptures to so-called Christians. They conducted mass in a language most didn't speak. Even now, the Vatican squirrels away who knows what down in some vault.
Yeh, in many places today it's not a mystery cult, if you ignore its origin, its history (and recent history at that), and nearly every other detail of consequence.
See also the additional New Testament citations I compiled in "Is Jesus Coming Again? The Predictors' Track Record Doesn't Inspire Confidence" [0]
(Some of the comments there are mildly amusing.)
[0] https://www.questioningchristian.com/2005/10/is_jesus_coming... (2005; self-cite)
And by "failed" I mean it seems clear from Matthew 24:34 that first generation Christians believed the end times would occur within their lifetimes (assuming that account is credible,) and such a belief is consistent with every other apocalyptic cult, Christian or otherwise. Like Seventh Day Adventists, Christians do keep kicking the can down the road, but just as the book of Revelations more likely refers to Nero Caesar and a belief at the time that he would return from the dead ("Nero Redivius[0]") than some future nuclear war where the "locusts" are really Apache helicopters[1], so Christian beliefs about the second coming should be assumed to apply their own cultural and temporal context, rather than some as yet unknown future millennia removed.
Obviously the cult as a whole has been very, very successful.
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero_Redivivus
[1]I know people who believe this, and they'll claim it as evidence of the Bible's divine prophetic power.