Teachings of Jesus, Letters of Paul, and John Teach About This Doctrine

Doctrine of Last Things (Eschatology-last/final)-Second Coming of Christ / This is the major hope of the Christian faith:

I. Biblical Data:Old Testament (Number of predictions of a glorious, coming, Messianic kingdom which didn’t materialize with Jesus first coming) Is. 9:6-7 (Endless reign of peace and justice); Is. 11:1-10 (reign of peace in which the knowledge of God fills all the land); Da. 7:13-14 (Vision of human like figure, but he is coming with the clouds of heaven and when presented before God, God gives him all rule and authority that is an everlasting kingdom that will never pass away)

New Testament (250 references to the second coming): Mark 13 (Olivet discourse); 1 Thess. 4:13-5:11 (The Second Coming is Predicated on the Resurrection)Paul uses so many of the same images that Jesus uses in the Olivet discourse (sudden coming in the night, no escape, unexpectedness, the return of Christ in the air and the dead in Christ rising to meet him); 1 John 3:2-3

Teachings of Jesus, Letters of Paul, and John teach about this doctrine.

NT Vocabulary of the Second Coming: Parousia (def: coming, presence / 2 Thess. 1:8); Apocaloopsis (def: revelation / 2 Thess. 2:8); Epiphenea (def:appearing / 2 Thess. 2:8)

II. The Nature of the Second Coming (One Coming or Many): 2 Views that Posit Multiple Returns of Christ

1. Rapture View[Dispensationalism] (19th cent. Anglo-Irish Evangelist (1827) John Darby; Invisible Return of Christ to Snatch Away Believers Before the Visible Final Return of Christ): This is not a historic view. Scofield Reference Bible adopted and popularized this view. Dallas Theological Seminary holds this view. Hal Lindsey. Left Behind Series.

Problems: Olivet Discourse Does Not Teach the Rapture (Tribulation occurs first, after the tribulation comes the visible return of Christ; no mention of an invisible return). Where does this teaching come from then? 1 Thess. 4:15-17 (Invisible return), 1 Thess. 5 (Visible Return) / RESPONSE: Weak grounds for seeing an invisible return. Moreover, the Greek word used for meeting the Lord is used to describe the people of a city going out to meet an incoming dignitary or a returning conqueror. The elect of God will be gathered to the air to meet him as he returns visibly to the Earth (Mark 13:27). 1 Thess. 4 also speaks of the event at which the resurrection of the dead occurs which occurs at the end of time. John 5:25-29 (Son of Man, judgment; final resurrection when the Son of Man comes where the evil and just are both resurrected). 1 Cor. 15:51-55 When Christ returns that is when death will be defeated, it won’t carry on for a while; 1 Cor:15:22-26 Death is the final enemy to be conquered, and this happens at the end of human history. In 2 Thess. 2:1-8, same even in 1 Thess. 4:15, the return of Christ occurs after the rebellion, apostasy, and man of lawlessness. In fact, Mark 13 is remniscient of the abomination of desolation that occurred earlier in Jewish history when AntiocusEpiphaneas sacrificed a hog on the alter of the templethereby defiling the temple, and Jesus says that when you see this happen flee to the mountains. Paul says that the when the man of lawlessness appears he will take his seat in the temple of God proclaiming to be God. This shows that this event follows the rebellion, etc. In Mark 13:27, the gathering of the saints is the same word in to 2 Thess. 2:1 for gathering. Where did Paul get his beliefs about the second coming? From the teachings of Jesus (oral or written tradition).

Imminency: If you don’t think that a rapture is going to happen, then imminency is not literally true of every generation because there are various signs that have to transpire first, although epistemically (since we don’t know when the end is coming), the second coming is imminent.

2. Partial Preterist View: (N.T. Wright, Richard France) The vents predicted by Jesus in Mark 13 have already happened in AD 70 with the destruction of Jerusalem (Cannibalism, starvation, death, slaughter war). The coming of the Son of Man already happened. Both views then, posit an invisible return of Christ prior to the visible and final return of Christ. So, In Mark 13:14- are describing the Roman massacre, 24-25 are taken to be typical apocalyptic imagery which describes God’s great revelation especially the events of the end time (stars falling isn’t meant to be literal, and these same images are found in the OT, Isa. 13:10, Ez. 32:7; NT- Acts 2). Moreover, the Mark 13 is the fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy and it is clear that it is not meant to be a descent to the Earth, it is the coming of the Son of Man before the heavenly throne of God. The gathering of the elect from the four winds means that the gospel will go out to the world. The passage is either literally fulfilled or symbolic of other events that have already taken place.

CRITIQUE: The real motivation for this interpretation if v. 30 of Mark 13 where Jesus speaks of ‘this generation’ not passing away before all these things take place. However, it posits an invisible return and that doesn’t seem to match well with Scripture:

-It seems clear that the coming of the Son of Man is visible and a coming to Earth

-The verb ‘to come’ is a perspectival word, or verb, it is relative to the perspective of the observer (Acts 1:11); it doesn’t mean coming into some invisible heavenly throne room. Mark 13:26 says that they (the people) coming will be a visible event. Mark 14:61-62 Jesus says you will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven. This is in contrast to other false Messiahs where Jesus is saying that his coming won’t be private and secret like these false Messiah’s (Matt 24:26-27). Rev. 1:7 where John speaks of Christ’s second coming as visible.

-The Son of Man doesn’t have to wait around until AD 70 to be enthroned. Rather, Jesus reigns immediately after his resurrection and ascension (1 Cor. 15:23-26 / written in AD 55; Heb. 2:7-9

-The real Achilles heel, like the rapture view is the resurrection of the dead.

WHAT DOES ‘This generation’ refer to then? It could mean the generation Jesus is speaking to, it could refer to the Jewish race or people, or mankind, it could mean the end time generation. Moreover, since prophecies can have multiple fulfillments. For example, think of ways the NT writers use OT passages like Isa. 7:14 (this was clearly fulfilled in Isaiah's own time). So, why couldn’t there be a proleptic, or advance, or provisionary fulfillment of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70, but it would be merely a preview of a greater tribulation and destruction that will take place in the end times before the second coming of Christ.

III. The Nature of the Second Coming is going to be a real historical, personal (1 Thess. 4:14-),decisive (marking the close of human history 1 Cor. 15:24) glorious(Matt. 24:30), triumphant (Rev. 1:7), sudden (Matt. 24:37-44; 1 Thess. 5:1-6) return of Christ to the Earth.

IV. What is the purpose of the second coming?

-It completes the work of salvation (1 Cor. 15:22-28; 50-57). Death and sin will be conquered when Christ returns. His resurrection is the forerunner and harbinger of our own resurrection. For now, we are inwardly raised with Christ and sin is being overcome with the Holy Spirit, but we still have this treasure in earthen vessels that are subject to death.

-John 5:28-29: It is for the resurrection of all the dead.

-It is for the judgment of all people (Matt 16:27; 1 Cor. 4:3-5;Jude 14-15)

- Matt. 24:29-31/It is for the gathering of the church.

- He will come to defeat his enemies.

V. The Nature of the Delay of the Parousia

-In his Olivet Discourse Jesus gave several sign that must come to pass prior to his coming: persecution, world-wide witness of the church, religious apostasy, wars, conflicts, natural disturbances. In addition, Paul said that certain things must take place prior to the second coming: the coming of the lawless one (2 Thess. 2), full number of the Gentiles coming into the church and then all of Israel would be saved. This is why it is so stunning then when Jesus says in Mark 13 that all these things will come to pass within this generation. Mark 8:38-39 is even clearer.

SOLUTION 1: Preterists answer this by saying that all of these things did place in AD 70, and the Son of Man came before God, and was enthroned and although not literal in heaven, it did occur on Earth in AD 70.

SOLUTION 2: Perhaps the prophecy was changed. We know in the OT there are examples where prophecies have been given such as in Jonah with regard to Nineveh being destroyed in 40 days that was changed because of its conditional nature (i.e. repentance by the Ninevites). However, there isn’t any clear event that would cause Jesus’ prediction to change.

SOLUTION 3 (Craig’s view): The prophecy is ambiguous. We don’t really know the original context and meaning of these words so that we can’t know that Jesus was in fact predicting that the parousia would occur within a generation. When we recall that the Gospels are not a literal tape recording of Jesus words. In fact, since they are written in Greek, and Jesus spoke in primarily in Aramaic, we can see that we don’t have a transcript of what Jesus said. Moreover, there wasn’t any such literary device akin to quotation marks (direct, and indirect speech can blur together) which meant that speeches would sometimes be given from memory. So, we shouldn’t think that we always have all the words of Jesus in their exact context and ordering. For example, Matt. 10:23 compared with Mark 6:7-13. What you find is that Matthew blends in with the material from Mark certain prophecies about the end times about the coming of the Son of Man. Originally, this was probably a verse about the coming of the Son of Man, but here, Matthew has woven it into this mission discourse to the twelve, and yet Matt. clearly knew that the coming of the Son of Man didn’t occur before the mission of the Twelve was over. He knew that they went through the towns of Israel and continued their apprenticeship with Jesus, and Jesus went on to the cross, and all the rest of it, and yet by putting this verse in this context, it makes it sound like the Son of Man would come again before they went through the cities of Israel. However, if Matt. 10:23 didn’t mean that the Son of Man was going to come before the mission of the Twelve was over there is no reason to think that Mark 13:30 means that the Son of Man is going to come again within the time frame of the one generation. We can’t be sure how this saying when it was originally given what it meant. Look again at Mark 13:30; what does ‘all these things must take place first’ refer to? Look at v. 29. We see that the phrase ‘these things’ doesn’t include the coming of the Son of Man, but rather, ‘these things’ must first happen prior to the Son of Man coming. What does it include then? According to v. 23, all the signs before the coming of the Son of Man such as persecution, destruction of Jerusalem will take place before the Son of Man comes. It may just be that putting v. 30 later in the discourse it makes it sound like the Son of Man is part of ‘these things’ when in fact it is not. Moreover, we have already seen reason to think that this phrase may not be in its original context.

-Mark 8:38, 9:1 What did this mean in the original context? What Jesus says is that the people alive there will see that the kingdom of God has come with power which could very well mean that they will see that it has already come with great within Jesus own ministry of miracle workings and his exorcism of demonic beings which he said were signs of the in-breaking of the kingdom of God, or it could refer to his death and resurrection from the dead, it could also refer to the transfiguration which took place next. Thus, it may very well be that in the original context Jesus was not saying that there are people here who will see the Son of Man returning in power and glory before they die. It is interesting to see how Matt. 16:28 interprets this verse. Here, Matthew is giving back the same event but he rewords it and it does sound more like he is saying that the Son of Man will come within a generation. However, he is paraphrasing Mark, and since Mark is earlier. This illustrates the overall point that Craig is making, namely, we don’t always have a handle on all the details of the original context.

-Moreover, this is quite consistent with what Jesus says elsewhere, namely that he doesn’t know when the second coming will be, but he can say that ‘these things’ must happen prior to the second coming nonetheless. In fact, what you find is quite a number of parables given by Jesus suggesting quite a long delay before the Son of Man returns. Matt. 24:45-51, Luke 12:35-48 – Peter asks Lord is this parable for us, or for all? And the Lord says that it is for all believers at all times to ready. Matt. 25:1-13; 14-30; 31-46

Thus, we seem to have very good reason to believe that Jesus thought he would come again, but that he didn’t know when it was going to be, and that he prepared his disciples for the possibility that it may take a very long time. Thus, the two verses in Mark (9:1 13:30) should be read against this broader context of the teaching of Jesus where we see within Mark 13 we see that idea a lot of things would have to happen prior to the second coming and that the Fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 may have been just a foreshadowing of a final tribulation and Fall of Jerusalem and that although Jesus may have thought that many of these things would take place within the next generation, I don’t think we have any good grounds for thinking that Jesus thought that the coming of the Son of Man was going to take place within the lifetime of his contemporaries.

WHAT ABOUT THE WORD GENERATION ITSELF? The vast majority of exegetes agree that when Jesus uses this phrase throughout the Gospels he is referring to the contemporary generation.

WHAT ABOUT 2 Pet. 3:3-4? People are asking where the Son of Man is? Peter replies to this question by saying that, ‘But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.’ This fits well with Mark 13:10 as well where Jesus speaks of the gospel being preached to allthe nations prior to the coming of the Son of Man.

In John 21 there was a rumor going about that the beloved disciple would not die before Jesus returns. However, what Jesus said is that if it is my will that he remain until I come what is that to you Peter, you follow me. Moreover, some people in 2 Thess. thought that maybe he had come already but Paul corrects them. Thus, we need to differentiate between what people may have believed, and what the NT teaches, and the NT doesn’t teach that Christ would return within his generation. What about Paul though? Paul lived a sense of expectancy, so when he says things like when Christ comes again, we who are alive will meet Christ in the air I think there that he is dividing Christians into two camps: those who are dead and those who are alive at the time of Christ’s return, and he can’t very well say that we who are dead because he is alive, and he wouldn’t have mentioned the dead if he thought it was going to occur within his lifetime. Moreover, suppose this tension weren’t there, then people could just relax, but in the wisdom of God, we have to be like those wise servants who are always ready.

---IF JESUS REALLY DID SAY THAT THE END OF THE SPACE-TIME WORLD WAS GOING TO HAPPEN WITHIN THE LIFETIME OF HIS CONTEMPORARIES, THEN AFTER HIS CRUCIFIXION, AND AFTER A GENERATION PASSED BY AND THE WORLD DIDN’T END, THEN NOBODY WOULD HAVE COME TO BELIEVE THAT HE WAS:

B) THE SON OF MAN WHO WOULD COME AGAIN UNLESS HE WAS RESURRECTED IN THE FIRST PLACE BECAUSE A SECOND COMING PRESUPPOSES A BODILY RESURRECTION.

BECAUSE:

1. Their leader was dead. And Jews had no belief in a dying, much less rising, Messiah. The Messiah was supposed to throw off Israel’s enemies (= Rome) and re-establish a Davidic reign—not suffer the ignominious death of criminal.

2. According to Jewish law, Jesus’ execution as a criminal showed him out to be a heretic, a man literally under the curse of God (Deut. 21.23). The catastrophe of the crucifixion for the disciples was not simply that their Master was gone, but that the crucifixion showed, in effect, that the Pharisees had been right all along, that for three years they had been following a heretic, a man accursed by God!

3. Jewish beliefs about the afterlife precluded anyone’s rising from the dead to glory and immortality before the general resurrection at the end of the world. All the disciples could do was to preserve their Master’s tomb as a shrine where his bones could reside until that day when all of Israel’s righteous dead would be raised by God to glory.