1-  This Generation Prophecy:

Matthew 15:24 24 Jesus answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
Matthew 24:34  "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."
Matthew 5:17-20, Matthew 23:1-3 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

From Gary DeMar:

(Emphasis below are mine, Osama Abdallah)

"Every time “this generation” (he genea haute) is used in the gospels, it refers to the generation of Jesus’ day: Matthew 11:16; 12:41, 45; 23:36; 24:34; Mark 8:12 (twice), 38; 13:30; Luke 7:31; 11:29, 30, 31, 32, 50, 51, 17:25; 21:32.

The use of the near demonstrative “this” forces the interpreter to understand Jesus to mean the generation to whom He was speaking. If Jesus had a future generation in view, He could have easily alleviated any confusion by using the far demonstrative “that” to distinguish His use of “this generation” in Matthew 24 (and Mark 13:30 and Luke 21:32) from every other time He used “this generation.”

Let me call in some experts on the subject to show that Tommy is far off base when it comes to his non-literal interpretation of “this generation” in the Olivet Discourse.

Tommy wrote that an “allegorical or non-literal interpretation imports an idea not found specifically in the text of a passage.” So how does Tommy change “this generation” into a future generation? He adds words to the text. In their book Charting the End Times, Tommy and co-author Tim LaHaye argue that Matthew 24:34 should read, “The generation that ‘sees’ these things will not pass till all is fulfilled.” 10 In order to get this meaning, “this” has to be replaced with “the” and four words have to be added to the verse: “The generation that sees these signs will not pass away. . . .” This is not the way to interpret the Bible. In addition, we are told in Matthew 24:33 who will see the signs: “even so you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door.” The “you” is them not us." (Source)

Bibliography:

5-  Robert G. Bratcher and Eugene A. Nida, A Translator’s Handbook of the Gospel of Mark (New York: United Bible Societies, 1961), 419.
6-  D.A. Carson, “Matthew” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, gen. ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1985), 8:507.
7-  John Nolland The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 988–989.
8-  William Sanford LaSor, The Truth About Armageddon: What the Bible Says About the End Times (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1987), 122.
9-  Jack P. Lewis, The Gospel According to Matthew, Part 2; Living Word Commentary: Sweet Publishing, 1976), 128.
10- Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice, Charting the End Times: A Visual Guide to Understanding Bible Prophecy (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2001), 36.

Source: https://americanvision.org/6071/clarifying-tommy-ices-clarifications/#.UArLdaDvb5k 

Gary DeMar further says:

(Emphasis below are mine, Osama Abdallah)

"If “this generation” in Matthew 24:34 means what it means everywhere else in the gospels — the generation to whom Jesus was speaking — then the use of parousia by Jesus must refer to the period of that first-century generation. As to the timing of Jesus’ parousia, James wrote to his first-century audience that “the coming of the Lord is near” (James 5:8). The above lexicon referenced by Tommy states that the parousia of Jesus “nearly always” refers to “his Messianic Advent in glory to judge the world at the end of this age.” But this is what’s in dispute. When is the end of the age? The “ends of the ages” (1 Cor. 10:11), “these last days” (Heb. 1:1–2), and the “consummation of the ages” (Heb. 9:26) are references to the generation of the apostles, not a distant end-time age.

Contrary to what the “The leading Greek Lexicon of our day says,” the parousia of Jesus in Matthew 24 is not linked to the judgment of “the world.” It’s about the judgment of the temple (24:1–2) and Judea (24:15–20). Notice what Matthew 24:15 states: “When YOU see the abomination of desolation.” Throughout the discourse, Jesus continually uses the second person plural. Consider what He says in verse 33: “so, YOU too, when YOU see all these things, recognize that He is NEAR, right at the door.” It was that audience that would “see all these things.” This confirms the statement by James that “the coming of the Lord is near” (5:8). “Near” is defined by Jesus as “right at the door” to that first-century generation.

Those in Judea could escape the coming judgment by fleeing to the mountains (Matt. 24:16). Jesus was not describing a world-wide conflagration but one that could be easily escaped on foot. While I’m certainly not in the same league of those who wrote the “leading Greek Lexicon of our day” (and neither is Tommy), their comment that parousia “nearly always” refers to a yet future “Messianic Advent in glory” where Jesus will “judge the world at the end of this age” is interpretive overreaching.

There is no doubt that parousia means “presence.” In fact, I have a list of more than 50 authorities that confirm that parousia means “presence,” so this is not in dispute. The more significant question is to what event does the use of parousia in the Olivet Discourse refer, and what is the nature of Jesus’ “presence”? Milton Terry’s comments make it clear that the context and timing are very specific:

Whatever the real nature of the parousia, as contemplated in this prophetic discourse, our Lord unmistakably associates it with the destruction of the temple and city, which he represents as the signal termination of the pre-Messianic age. 2

Terry is an important authority on interpretive issues since dispensationalists give his book Biblical Hermeneutics high praise. Like Tommy Ice, Milton Terry describes his interpretive methodology as “grammatico-historical” 3 Confirming what he wrote in Biblical Apocalyptics on the timing of the events in the Olivet Discourse, Terry asks, “On what valid hermeneutical principles, then, can it be fairly claimed that this discourse of Jesus comprehends futurity? Why should we look for the revelations of far distant ages and millenniums of human history in a prophecy expressly limited to the generation in which it was uttered?” 4 " (Source)

Bibliography:

2-  Milton Terry, Biblical Apocalyptics: A Study of the Most Notable Revelations of God and of Christ in the Canonical Scriptures (New York: Eaton & Mains, 1898), 246–247.
3-  Milton Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments (New York: Phillips & Hunt, 1883.), 205.
4-  Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, 443.

Source: https://americanvision.org/6133/jesus-and-the-parousia/#.UA6VhaDvb5k

Gary DeMar further says:

(Emphasis below are mine, Osama Abdallah)

"Second, the audience reference is contemporary with Jesus: “Then if anyone says to YOU, ‘Behold, here is the Christ,’ or ‘There He is,’ do not believe [πιστεύσητε: 2nd person plural] him” (Matt. 24:23). Why would Jesus warn His disciples about false Christs if there wouldn’t be any false Christs in their day?

Third, there is no “scholarly consensus” that there were no false Christs until around A.D. 130. Hebrew and Rabbinic scholar John Lightfoot (1602–1675) wrote:

“False Christs broke out, and appeared in public with their witchcrafts, so much the frequenter and more impudent, as the city and people drew nearer to its ruin; because the people believed the [Messiah] should be manifested before the destruction of the city; and each of them pretended to be the [Messiah] by these signs.” 2

Grant R. Osbourne writes that [t]hese pretenders appeared often in the first century and throughout the history of the church. . . .” (Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 887.)) R. T. France also argues that there were false Christs leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem that took place in A.D. 70:

“The catastrophic situation in Jerusalem during those last days before its capture will provide a fertile breeding-ground for the sort of messianic claimants already predicted in vv. 5 and 11 as part of the more general upheaval of the period before the siege. Anyone who offered new hope of divine intervention would be eagerly listened to, and the more so if they were able to offer ‘signs and wonders’ to support their claim. And such miraculous proofs were, according to Josephus, offered by several of the nationalist leaders he mentions: he cites specifically the parting of the Jordan (Ant. 20.97), the collapse of the city walls (Ant. 20:170), the uncovering of Moses’ sacred vessels (Ant. 18:85), as well as more generally ‘conspicuous wonders and signs’ (Ant. 20:168) and God-given ‘signs of freedom’ (War 2:2.259).” (R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew: The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007), 916–917).))

In a footnote, France writes, “Such ‘false Messiahs and false prophets’ active during the siege might include Simon bar-Giora (Josephus, War 4:503-44 etc.), who was regarded as a ‘king’ (510) . . .  and also ‘many’ false prophets noted anonymously in War 6.285-88; that last passage goes on to relate (6.289–300) a series of signs and wonders occurring in the period before the city was destroyed, which some took (wrongly) to be omens of deliverance.” 3

There were so many impostors preying on the gullibility of the people that under the procuratorship of Felix (Acts 23:24), “many of them were apprehended and killed every day. They seduced great numbers of the people still expecting the Messiah; and well therefore might our Saviour caution his disciples against them.” 4

Fourth, Dispensationalist Larry Spargimino states that “false messiahs were not limited to the first century.” 5 This means, according to him, there were false messiahs in the first century. What’s interesting about Spargimino’s comment is that it appears in a book edited by Tommy Ice.

Fifth, James B. Jordan writes:

“There is plenty of evidence in the Scriptures . . . that there was a group of Christian leaders who claimed to have the anointing (messiah) of apostles, who claimed to be prophets and teachers, and who did indeed mislead many believers. They were a constant danger in the apostolic era, and a great deal of Paul’s writings in particular deal with their deceptions. We are thinking, of course, of the Judaizers. 

“The Judaizers were the heirs of the tradition-serving Jewish teachers who were Jesus’ worst enemy. The Judaizers are the constant enemy in Acts and the epistles. They are the anti-christs of the Johannine letters, who claimed to have been sent out by the apostles but who were not “of us” (1 John 2:18-19; 4:1). 6 They are the main enemy in the book of Revelation.

“The Judaizers fit perfectly Jesus’ predictions. They claimed to come in His name. They misled many. They claimed an anointing, but it was false. They were false prophets.”

To bring all of this to a conclusion, Tommy Ice is mistaken in his claim that “there is scholarly consensus that there were not false Christs or Messiahs until around A.D. 130.”" (Source)