Maybe it would be helpful to share a specific example. Compare Mark 13:4 with Matthew 24:3. The disciples ask Jesus slightly different questions in the two versions. In Mark they simply ask about the destruction of the Temple. In Matthew they also ask about the end of the age.

That changes the interpretation of everything that follows. Since the context is Jesus predicted the destruction of the Temple it is most logical to understand their subsequent question and Jesus' answer as referring to that. In that case we would anticipate the fulfillment to be in 70 CE when the Romans destroy the Temple. Since the city of Jerusalem was destroyed and both Jewish and Christian residents were forced into exile, that would be an incredibly traumatic event that pushed the Church outward and into a new age of history.

In Matthew we specifically have the question about the end of the age added to the disciples questions. Most scholars believe that Mark was written first and was a source used by Matthew. If we believe that Mark was written before 70 and Matthew after than the failure of Jesus to return then could be explained by the additional part of the question. There is a lot of evidence in Paul as well that the apostles believed that Jesus would return within that generation.

I have taught Bible studies and adult discipleship classes at a large church in the Boston area. I am also friendly with and have worked with some Harvard Divinity School professors. Many of them have incredibly strong faith, it just doesn't express itself in traditionally Evangelical ways.

I did read you article and enjoyed it. My problem is that I currently struggle with most "there are only three choices" arguments. It is similar to CS Lewis' famous trilemma. As I have read and reflected their are easily ten other options that have been discussed and offered by historians, philosophers, and people from other religious traditions.

Blessings