Olivet Discourse Question
Forum category
I was thinking about the Olivet Discourse today and was struck by a puzzling thought. Using Matthew’s language, the disciples ask, “What will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” In my head, I’ve always glossed this as, “What is the sign of when you will return from heaven at the Second Advent and consummate world history?” But there seems to be a terrible problem with interpreting the disciples’ question this way. I think it is generally agreed that despite Jesus’ teaching, they did not clearly understand that he was about to die and rise from the dead. Furthermore, even at the Last Supper, they seem confused about where and how he is going away. So, how is it that people who didn’t even understand about Christ’s death, resurrection and ascencion could ask a question about the second coming?
Is it possible that they, sitting on the temple mount, used the word παρουσια to refer to Jesus’ triumphal entry into the temple as the Messiah of Israel, thereby closing the age? In other words, they didn’t know that they were asking a question about eschatology.
Is it possible that they, sitting on the temple mount, used the word παρουσια to refer to Jesus’ triumphal entry into the temple as the Messiah of Israel, thereby closing the age? In other words, they didn’t know that they were asking a question about eschatology.
a pointed bump
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
[Charlie] a pointed bumpHi Charlie. I’ve been a bit busy. Head cook for our women’s banquet gobbled up my week. We guys cooked for 120. But boy, did we eat: Chicken Paprikosh or Hungarian Beef Goulash…I’ll be heading to Moody Pastor’s Conference…so I may be sparse for a bit. If I don’t reply to your reply, I’ll hopefully catch you later.
I believe the disciples expected Jesus to set up his kingdom without dying and rising. His “coming” is probably best understood more like his coronation. We know that his disciples tried to force him to be their king in the earthly sense. In 2 Peter 1, Peter refers to the event of the Mount of Transfiguration as His “coming.”
The Jews had different views as to what would bring about the Messiah’s coming. Bet Hillel said that if all the Jews repented, the Messiah would come. Bet Hillel said no violence or revolt would be necessary; if the Jews were godly, God would take care of Israel’s oppressors. This seemed to be the track that Jesus took when He preached repentance and the message that the Kingdom of Heaven was at hand. Bet Shammai — they guys who had all the power and the majority— viewed political means as a method to bring in the kingdom, and thus viewed the Messiah somewhat as a military leader. Bet Shammai had connections both toward Herod and the Zealots. So there were all sorts of views around but the disciples probably understood Jesus as siding with the viewpoint of Bet Hillel.
So, the bottom line is that the disciples were asking about Jesus taking the reins of political power in their lifetime but the answer he gave them was much more long-ranged.
Don’t know if that is what you wanted to get it or no?
Bless you, bro.
"The Midrash Detective"
Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. It seems that there was probably quite a bit of disconnect between the question they asked and the question they answered. Or we might say that Jesus answered them according to what they said but probably not what they meant.
My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com
Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin
R. T. France, in his http://books.google.com/books?id=0ruP6J_XPCEC&pg=PA395] commentary on Matthew 10:23 (The Gospel of Matthew p. 395-8), concludes that throughout Matthew (10:23; 16:27-28; 19:28; 24:30; 25:31; 26:64; 28:18), the concept of the Son of man coming is tied with Daniel 7:13-14. In other words, it speaks of coming into heaven, into power and into glory, but not of coming back to earth.
i suppose it’s possible the disciples were only thinking of temporal power, but i’d like to think that considering the inclusion of “the end of the age” that they are asking about a rise to ultimate power that includes temporal aspects.
i suppose it’s possible the disciples were only thinking of temporal power, but i’d like to think that considering the inclusion of “the end of the age” that they are asking about a rise to ultimate power that includes temporal aspects.
Discussion