I don't.
Check it out.
'Our' redemption is not in view here, and yes, those to whom He was addressing were indeed rescued/delivered from the great tribulation that befell that generation.
"Redemption.--.....The word, familiar as it is to us, is, in the special form here used, another of those characteristic of St. Paul's phraseology (
Romans 3:24;
Romans 8:23;
1Corinthians 1:30;
Ephesians 1:7, et al.). It occurs also in
Hebrews 9:15;
Hebrews 11:35.
In its primary meaning here it points to the complete deliverance of the disciples from Jewish persecutions in Palestine that followed on the destruction of Jerusalem. The Church of Christ was then delivered from what had been its most formidable danger."
Ellicot's Commentary
Yes.
63 But Jesus held his peace. And
the high priest said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou art the Christ, the Son of God.
64 Jesus said unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless
I say unto you, Henceforth
ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven. Mt 26
Christ may have been speaking to Caiaphas here, but it's interesting to note that Josephus records that Annas, father-in-law to Caiaphas (Jn 18:13, Lk 3:2, Acts 4:6), perished in the seige of Jerusalem 70 AD along with some 8,000 other priests.
Gill on
Matthew 26:64:
"...when he says they should "see" him, his meaning is
not, that they should see him at the right hand of God with their bodily eyes, as Stephen did; but that they should, or at least might, see and know by the effects, that he was set down at the right hand of God; as by the pouring forth of the holy Spirit upon his disciples, on the day of pentecost; by the wonderful spread of his Gospel, and the success of it, notwithstanding all the opposition made by them, and others; and
particularly, by the vengeance he should take on their nation, city, and temple; and which may be more especially designed in the next clause;
and
coming in, the clouds of heaven. So
Christ's coming to take vengeance on the Jewish nation, as it is
often called the coming of the son of man, is described in this manner, Mt 24:27...."
Edersheim:
“......It was upon this that the High-Priest, in the most solemn manner, adjured the True One by the Living God, Whose Son He was, to say it, whether He were the Messiah and Divine, the two being so joined together, not in Jewish belief, but to express the claims of Jesus. No doubt or hesitation could here exist. Solemn, emphatic, calm, majestic, as before had been His silence, was now His speech. And His assertion of what He was, was conjoined with that of
what God would show Him to be, in His Resurrection and Sitting at the Right Hand of the Father, and of what they also would see, when He would come in those clouds of heaven that would break over their city and polity in the final storm of judgment.” Edersheim, Life & Times, Book 5, Chap 13
Russell:
The words themselves are sufficiently simple. All the obscurity and difficulty have been imported into them by the reluctance of interpreters
to recognise in the ' coming' of Christ a distinct and definite point of time within the space of the existing generation. Often as our Lord reiterates the assurance that he would come in His kingdom, come in glory, come to judge His enemies and reward His friends, before the generation then living on earth -bad wholly passed away,
there seems an almost invincible repugnance on the part of theologians to accept His words in their plain and obvious sense. They persist in supposing that He must have meant something else or something more.
Once admit, what is undeniable, that our Lord Himself declared that His coming was to take place in the lifetime of some of His disciples (Matt. xvi. 27, 28), and the whole difficulty vanishes..... -James Stuart Russell
