Replies

“Did Jesus return in 70AD?” ~ xzins

I report. You decide. :)

http://www.tektonics.org/esch/olivet01.html

[large snip]

Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Mark 13:26)

Luke 21:27-8 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.

“No way, Holding, NO WAY!!! You can’t say that Jesus came in the sky on a cloud in 70 AD! Get outta here!!!”

While the skeptics like our earlier-mentioned uninformed one are busy mocking, we’ll refer the reader to our corresponding study on Daniel with specific reference to the Son of Man imagery therein. For convenience, we will reproduce the most relevant paragraph here:

We know that the Son of Man envisioned here is Christ. What should be especially noted for our purposes is the Son of Man’s mode of transportation, and the direction he is going in. The Son of Man is riding with “the clouds of heaven” (the LXX has the Son of Man actually “on” the clouds) and heading towards the Ancient of Days to be enthroned. Miller [207] believes that the Son of Man rides from heaven to earth in this picture, but this is quite unlikely in view of the setting of God’s heavenly court (7:10). Goldingay [164] acknowledges that the scene of God on a throne of fire, surrounded by attendants, “locate the scene in heaven”; but counters that where “it is specifically a matter of God judging...the scene is normally on earth.” The verses he uses in support of this, however, could be said to fall to circular reasoning; for example, Jer. 49:38: “And I will set my throne in Elam, and will destroy from thence the king and the princes, saith the LORD.” Did God literally set his throne in Elam? (Other passages, like Ps. 96:10-13, say God will come to judge the earth, but how does this equate with God being physically present on earth?) Bottom line: The scene fits the placement of heaven better than it fits a placement on earth. Nor does it do to object that the scene must be on earth because of the earth and the sea seen by Daniel (7:3-4). Again, if we are thinking literal geography and envisioning here, then the Mormons must be right about God having a human body!

How then does this relate to the Olivet Discourse? The scene of Daniel 7, as Caird says [Wr.JVG, 341], involves not “a primitive form of space travel” but “a symbol for a mighty reversal of fortunes within history and at the national level...” The scene is one of a victorious enthronement and vindication over enemies. To emphasize this, we will also need to pull in a verse from another part of the Gospels:
Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.(Mark 14:62)

Luke 22:69 Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God.

Jesus’ retort to Caiaphas, in light of the primary charge that Jesus threatened the Temple, is of great significance in this context. “As a prophet, Jesus staked his reputation on his prediction of the Temple’s fall within a generation; if and when it fell, he would thereby be vindicated.” Jesus also promoted himself as the new Temple which would replace the old one, with his predictions that he would raise a new one — his body — in three days. If the Temple did NOT fall, he would be proven a charlatan. But if the Temple did indeed fall, he would be vindicated — just like Daniel’s “Son of Man” which he claimed to be. In saying he will ride the clouds, Jesus is not saying, as Wright wryly notes, that Caiaphas would one say walk by a window, look outside, and see Jesus popping a wheelie on a cumulus. Rather Jesus is saying, “You will see me vindicated; you will see my predictions come true.” The “coming” — as noted, using the word erchomai, which specifies neither destination nor direction — alludes to the “going” of the Daniel 7 Son of Man from earth to heaven to be enthroned. Caipahas (or more likely, the collective assembled for the trial; as well as the “tribes of the earth” — Matthew uses “tribes” elsewhere only of Israel [19:18], and the word is used in the Septuagint to refer to them; and “earth” is ge, or land, can mean a limited area or the entire globe; in context, and in the light of the use of “tribes,” as well as the allusion to Zech 12:10 [”And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him”] it most likely means Jerusalem or Judaea only) will see the rise of the Christian movement (”from now on” or “hereafter” in the KJV), followed by the destruction of Jerusalem just as Jesus predicted — thus proving that he was and is the true Messiah, “the one in and through whom the covenant god is acting to set up his kingdom.”

Jesus also speaks, in all three versions, of being at the right hand of power — alluding all through again to Daniel 7 and the enthronement of the Son of Man. Hearken now back to the disciples’ original question. They want to know, in essence, when Jesus will assume the kingship. Jesus replies by indicating that “the Temple’s destruction would constitute his own vindication.” [Wr.JVG, 342] His parousia, his enthronement as king, would be “consequent upon the dethronement of the present powers that were occupying the holy city.” [346]

In the Jewish mindset, the establishment of a Temple was intertwined with kingship. Solomon built the first temple; Herod rebuilt the temple as a sign of his kingship; Bar Kochba showed intentions to rebuild the temple in the 130s AD as part of his pseudo-messianic program. In the new era, the temple of God is now the individual believer (1 Cor. 3:16-17, 6:19) and the body of believers (Eph. 2:21). The Spirit indwells in the believer, where the Shekinah once dwelt in the Jewish temple. Christ now sits at the right hand of the father (Heb. 12:22, Eph. 1:20, Acts 2:33, etc.) and rules his kingdom. Paul sees Christ reigning now, though all is not yet accomplished in that reign (1 Cor. 15:25). This is NOT to say that, as pantelists maintain, the resurrection has occurred already and Christ is through with the world. That can’t be read from the Scriptures. But it is clear that with the events of 70, the reign of Christ confirmed in a very unique way.

This leaves a couple of loose ends to tie up. Matthew does say as well that a “sign” shall be seen, seemingly in heaven; what of that? DeMar [165] explains that it is not the sign which is in heaven, but the Son of Man; thus what is seen is a sign which is not given any location. The word here is semeion, used by John often to refer to Jesus’ miracles; the word itself denotes a token of identification or verification. The destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple itself fits this bill. Finally, Luke relates this event to “redemption” — this word is used elsewhere in the NT to refer to salvation in a spiritual sense, but it could hardly mean this in any context, whether preterist or dispensational. What does it mean? Stein (commentary on Luke, 525) sees in the term an idea of consummation of hopes; one might relate this, then, to the tangible evidence of the enthronement of Christ that the destruction of Jerusalem and the “old order” provided. (I have been asked how the destruction of Jerusalem, considering that it resulted in increased tensions between the Jews and Christians [who were then expelled from the synagogue and lost any claim to the Romans that they fell under the protected umbrella of Judaism] would have been understood by Christians as their “redemption”. The answer lies in the difference of ancient personality. Such tensions upon individuals would have been placed, in the ancient mindset, secondarily to that which was better for the group and its efforts as a whole. Believe it or not, they would have taken the expulsion and persecution, not happily of course, but would have considered the redemptive sign worth the price. For more on this see my review of this book.)
Matthew 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.(Mark 13:27)

Dispensational paradigms have taught us that in this passage we have a picture of a “rapture” of believers, of divine beings picking us up by the ears and taking us home. But we should take some caution before jumping into this interpretation. All agree that “four winds” and “one end of heaven to the other” indicates a worldwide gathering, and the “elect” are believers, but the rest is open to examination.

First: “Angels” is aggelos, and while it is used of supernatural beings (Matt. 1:20, 13:40, 16:27, 28:2, Luke 1) it is also used of humans like John the Baptist (Matt. 12:10, Mark 1:2, Luke 7:27) and Jesus’ disciples (Luke 9:52) in the NT and in the Septuagint [DeM.LDM, 175]. The word does not denote a divine being per se, but a function, that of a messenger.

Second: the “trumpet” sounding admits to several options. Keener [587] notes that the trumpet was usually in the OT a call to war, and that this is found in pagan contexts as well, but this obviously won’t bear on this context. A trumpet is also used at the resurrection of the righteous (1 Cor. 15:52), which has often been cited in favor of a “rapture” interpretation. But there are other uses as well. A trumpet was used for various proclamations, for kingship, a celebration of triumph, for a call to worship, and for the assembly of God’s people.

Third: to “gather” means to collect in one place. This word (episunago) is used sparingly in the NT, and seems often to refer to a physical gathering, but not always: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!” Jesus’ intent here was not to physically gather together all the Israelites; the protective umbrella was the Messianic kingdom. The Greek word is also related to the word “synagogue” (sunagoge).

To tie it all together: We noted earlier that it is predicted that the end will come when the gospel is preached to the Roman Empire. Now Jesus tells us that following the destruction of Jerusalem, the messengers or “angels” or the gospel will take that gospel worldwide, to gather his elect, the body of Christ, the “people of God” (1 Peter 2:9-10).
Matthew 24:32-39 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. (Mark 13:28-32; Luke 21:29-33)

Of course we now come to the central point of contention that got this started. Jesus speaks of these things happening within “this generation.” The dispensational paradigm is required to understand “this generation” in other ways (i.e., the race of Jews, for example) but we have seen that these is no need for this. The generation Jesus spoke to saw these things fulfilled.

At this point the discourses diverge substantially. Mark 13 continues the discourse to verse 37 with admonitions to be watchful. Luke 21:34-6 does the same; Luke however, does place the “Noah” warning at 17:25 and adds a comparison to Sodom and Gomorrah. The warnings are good to go under any paradigm, and with that we leave Mark’s version of the discourse behind. We pick up with Matt. 24:40 and parallel:
Matthew 24:40-41 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Luke 18:35-6 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

Another “rapture” passage? “Taken” into the air, perhaps? Maybe not, and maybe the “taken” one is not the good guy at all:
Jer 6:11 Therefore I am full of the fury of the LORD; I am weary with holding in: I will pour it out upon the children abroad, and upon the assembly of young men together: for even the husband with the wife shall be taken, the aged with him that is full of days.

Furthermore, note the parallel in the previous passage in which the wicked are the ones “taken” by the Flood [Keener, 592; Gundry, commentary on Matthew, 494]. Those taken, are taken in judgment by the impending judgment on Jerusalem and Judaea, which would be no respecter of persons. That this is not a “rapture” verse is clear in that this is where Luke places the Matthew 24:28 remark about carcasses.

We now leave also Luke’s unique material. Matthew 24:42-51 continues with more warnings of watchfulness that work under any paradigm. We now close out with some items unique to Matthew, in chapter 25.
Matthew 25:1-2 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.

The parable of the wise and foolish virgins (25:1-13), followed by the parable of the talents (25:14-30), are both parables of general warning that fit under any paradigm. References to the bridegroom “tarrying” (25:5) do not necessarily comport with a substantial wait — as DeMar rightly notes, the bridegroom and the master return to the same people the story starts with. A “tarrying” within the generational period is more than sufficient to account for this, and if 2 Peter is to be reckoned, the doctrine of generation return was known to mockers and was being jeered at as early as the 50s and 60s, as we would expect.

But what of the apparent pictures of final judgment? They are, as Wright observes, actually threats to the “present nation of Israel” [JVG, 185] warning them to repent. “In the sad, noble, and utterly Jewish tradition of Elijah, Jeremiah, and John the Baptist, Jesus announced the coming judgment of Israel’s covenant god on his people, a judgment consisting of a great national, social and cultural disaster, ultimately comprehensible only in theological terms.” Like other signs in the Discourse, these are eschatological word-pictures — to be taken seriously enough as they stand.

This leaves the enormous account of Matthew 25:31-46, the sheep and the goats. We’ll offer enough to make the point clear:
When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world...Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels...And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

But surely this has not happened? Actually it has, and still does. All agree that the Bible teaches that judgment is entered upon death (Heb. 9:27). We cannot assume that what we are being offered here is a literal picture of events — no more so than people are actually sheep or goats, or that the millions of blessed and wicked will respond with exactly the same words at once as though they were some sort of Greek tragedy chorus. As DeMar rightly says, this depicts a “judgment over time” [DeM.LDM, 200]. Jesus is now exalted to his throne and is passing this sort of judgment as more and more pass on. His remarks to the sheep and goats, and their responses, are typified and stereotyped; this should also be obvious since they cannot be a complete catalog of virtuous and wicked acts. Matthew 25:31-46 is taking place even now — it is not a future judgment (exclusively), but it is a final one.

In conclusion: The impetus for this analysis, as noted at the beginning, was skeptical claims that the Bible wrongly taught a “soon” coming of Jesus. Dispensationalists try to solve this problem by redefining “soon”. Our solution is that all along they and others have mis-defined “coming”.

I have expected, and still expect, certain reactions to this argument. Skeptics I believe will continue to do as our one critic has, merely giving a brief description as though the arguments are refuted by exposure. Fellow believers may react “violently” (as one letter writer has, though providing no more refutation than the skeptic has), but I hope will explore this view, and allow scholarship rather than popular fiction and literature to govern their eschatology. John MacArthur is right at least in saying that eschatology is a central doctrine, inseparable from others and particularly the authority and divinity of Christ. We cannot afford to be satisfied with easy solutions.

Primary Sources Dem.LDM DeMar, Gary. Last Days Madness. American Vision, 1999. Mac.SC MacArthur, John. The Second Coming. Crossway Books, 1999. With.JPEW Witherington, Ben. Jesus, Paul and the End of the World. IVP, 1992. Wr.JVG Wright, N. T. Jesus and the Victory of God. Fortress, 1996.