C.S. Lewis wrote: "Say what you like," we shall be told, "the apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false.  It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime.  And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing.  Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion.  He said in so many words, 'This generation shall not pass till all these things be done.'  And he was wrong.  He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else."   

It is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.  Yet how teasing, also, that within fourteen words of it should come the statement "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."  The one exhibition of error and the one confession of ignorance grow side by side."

New to this site, have tried to get serious answers to questions about the Olivet Discourse from Christian websites and forums. Any attempts at resolving the problem with this verse always fail to take into account the totality of the words spoken by Christ in this discourse. Does anyone have a way of adressing this, without omitting or rewriting what the bible contains?

The Olivet discourse is a passage found in the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew (24), Mark (13) and Luke (21).

I see no way of providing a completely satisfactory explanation that removes all the difficulties in these passages given you prerequisites.  You are correct that this is the one, of perhaps less than six difficulties, that cannot be completely resolved. Within Christian apologetics there are several viewpoints alone.  CS Lewis' voices just one of them.

There is confusion over exactly what "these things" Jesus referred.  There is confusion over what was meant by "this generation" also. 

Given the uncertainty, is is unclear that the first statement contains an error or simply represents misinterpretation on CS Lewis' and now also on your part.  To your second point, there are several other occasions where Jesus is said to have acknowledged that as the son, his knowledge was limited by what the Father wished to reveal.  In other words, he often indicated his human qualities, which included limits.

So in summary you have indeed reintroduced one of the very few genuine Bible difficulties.  I note that many modern Bible footnotes alert to reader to this issue.

No it does not offer a solution, and I hope you didn't get the impression I was attempting to suggest that Christ's human qualities allowed for error on his part.  My response was intended to avoid the idea that there might be two problems here.  Again I agree with you that, given your prescription that no alterations in the transcribed words are allowed, the difficulty in the first phrase cannot be fully resolved.

To further clarify "pass" it is usefull to note the what the scriptures say:

NIV Matthew 16:27-28) For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. [28] I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

(NIV Matthew 24:34) I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.

It is difficult to interpret "pass" as anything other than die.

But do you think though for a moment that when we die we actually do see Christ and we do see all that has been foretold?  It's possible now isn't it?  It also says that there will be much that is not explained and much that we will not know... Thus saying I walk by faith not by sight.

YOu are correct. So, what we have is a split in the religion into Partial Preterism, Full Preterism, and Futurism.

All make Jesus out to be not a Lord, but a Lunatic or Liar.

Refer to  Matthew 10:23, Matthew 16:27-28, Matthew 24:34, Matthew 26:64, and Rev. 1:1-3.

I don't reconcile it. I'm not sure how anyone does. Maybe with the exceptions of those factions you mention, nobody does. It's either ignored, swept under the carpet of the subconscious or unknown by most Christians and thus not a problem. Plus to answer your question on a more general basis, in my opinion only a very small portion of the human race make decisions about their world view based on points of logic like this. I think this is true for lapsed Christians, former Christians who are now atheists. If you ask one, they will tell you it was an accumulation of skeptical questions, but I really doubt it. The impulse beneath the questions was emotional. Maybe the atheist couldn't bear the guilt. Or needed to liberate himself from the moral requirements for one reason or another, whatever, the drive is emotional.

For me , my intellectual questions are my way of trying to find a valid way to articulate my faith. Faith that is rooted in an emotional experience that serves as the basis for my epistemology.