a non-eschatological Coming?

[randyk]

I believe that in his Olivet Discourse Jesus tried to focus his disciples away from the eschatological Coming as something to practically prepare for and instead focus on current issues that make one prepared for the Kingdom by moral means. In other words, Jesus made current issues the decisive matter that determine our preparation for the coming Kingdom, and not a matter of predicting when certain events would take place, and trying to second-guess when they would happen.

Jesus said that in his own generation his disciples should be prepared to deal with the ungodliness of the vast number of Jews, who were about to come under judgment in 70 AD. This means Christians were to avoid the sins of the Jews, and instead not partake with them in the sins that Jesus described.

When asked about his Coming, Jesus made it clear that it would be in his generation a non-eschatological coming in judgment, using the Romans to destroy the temple in Jerusalem. Instead of looking far off in the future to an indefinite event, they should be managing their lives now in a spiritual way, ensuring that they ready themselves morally. The sins of the Jews were to be understood as so serious that it would bring down both the temple and Jerusalem. And so, it was important for Christians to separate themselves from whatever these sins were.

When Jesus said his Coming would be like the Days of Noah, when people engaged in regular social activities, like marrying and eating, he was describing the NT age in general. Throughout the course of the Christian era, Christian peoples have gradually married back into paganism, and have become unaware of the loss of their of moral stature. Becoming attached to the sins of the world, these fallen Christians have become blind to the soon-coming judgment upon the whole world!

Many Christians turn Christianity into a cheap 1,2,3 formula for becoming a Christian, go to church, and then live out their lives with little change with respect to the paganism around them. Gradually, they become so compromised that their Christianity is little more than a platitude, or a one-line confession that "I believe that Christ is my justification." And so, they think their own righteousness is utterly unnecessary, or far less necessary than believing in Christ for their acceptance before God.

In reality, we do need to recognize what is just and what is unjust around us, and keep ourselves unspoiled from the paganism around us. If we can't see the difference, for what have we been saved? If we cannot recognize the satanic oppression around us, what do we hope to be saved from?

Can we really believe that Salvation has nothing to do with personal holiness? Or do we think that holiness is purely a form of legalism, without spiritual content? We should live by faith, and thus allow the righteousness of Christ to indwell us always so that we are reassured that we have escaped the judgment of God coming upon the world. We should be concerned about God's judgment today, because how we are judged today is how we will be judged at the end of the world!

 

[Runningman]

Jesus destroyed the temple, did away with animal sacrifices, and the priesthood. Now He is our sacrifice, our high priest, and our body is the temple of God. I think few people make the connection that when Jesus said "the kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:20-21) that He was being quite down to Earth about that.

 

[randyk]

Jesus destroyed the temple, did away with animal sacrifices, and the priesthood. Now He is our sacrifice, our high priest, and our body is the temple of God. I think few people make the connection that when Jesus said "the kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:20-21) that He was being quite down to Earth about that.

Yes, I think it can be taken both ways, that he is "among us" and "within us." Means the same thing.

The image in my mind is of the tabernacle being placed, by God, in the midst of Israel travelling through the wilderness. God wanted to be "among them," as well as *in their midst." Means the same thing.

The only difference today, in the NT era, is that not only has God drawn near to us when we choose to follow His laws, but He can dwell *within us* as a permanent habitation, since our sins have been forgiven for all time.

But you're exactly right. The temple, which was destructible, was taken away, and he determined to be our eternal dwelling place.

 

[Amanuensis]

I believe that in his Olivet Discourse Jesus tried to focus his disciples away from the eschatological Coming as something to practically prepare for and instead focus on current issues that make one prepared for the Kingdom by moral means. In other words, Jesus made current issues the decisive matter that determine our preparation for the coming Kingdom, and not a matter of predicting when certain events would take place, and trying to second-guess when they would happen.

Jesus said that in his own generation his disciples should be prepared to deal with the ungodliness of the vast number of Jews, who were about to come under judgment in 70 AD. This means Christians were to avoid the sins of the Jews, and instead not partake with them in the sins that Jesus described.

When asked about his Coming, Jesus made it clear that it would be in his generation a non-eschatological coming in judgment, using the Romans to destroy the temple in Jerusalem. Instead of looking far off in the future to an indefinite event, they should be managing their lives now in a spiritual way, ensuring that they ready themselves morally. The sins of the Jews were to be understood as so serious that it would bring down both the temple and Jerusalem. And so, it was important for Christians to separate themselves from whatever these sins were.

When Jesus said his Coming would be like the Days of Noah, when people engaged in regular social activities, like marrying and eating, he was describing the NT age in general. Throughout the course of the Christian era, Christian peoples have gradually married back into paganism, and have become unaware of the loss of their of moral stature. Becoming attached to the sins of the world, these fallen Christians have become blind to the soon-coming judgment upon the whole world!

Many Christians turn Christianity into a cheap 1,2,3 formula for becoming a Christian, go to church, and then live out their lives with little change with respect to the paganism around them. Gradually, they become so compromised that their Christianity is little more than a platitude, or a one-line confession that "I believe that Christ is my justification." And so, they think their own righteousness is utterly unnecessary, or far less necessary than believing in Christ for their acceptance before God.

In reality, we do need to recognize what is just and what is unjust around us, and keep ourselves unspoiled from the paganism around us. If we can't see the difference, for what have we been saved? If we cannot recognize the satanic oppression around us, what do we hope to be saved from?

Can we really believe that Salvation has nothing to do with personal holiness? Or do we think that holiness is purely a form of legalism, without spiritual content? We should live by faith, and thus allow the righteousness of Christ to indwell us always so that we are reassured that we have escaped the judgment of God coming upon the world. We should be concerned about God's judgment today, because how we are judged today is how we will be judged at the end of the world!

Without holiness no man shall see the Lord. I am fully persuaded that Jesus taught that living a life of holiness and righteousness was necessary to eschatological salvation. To be ready for His Coming means having our lights burning with good works and bearing fruit. It means having no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness.

Of course not arguing with people about doctrines and interpretation and getting into immature sinful debates is part of that holiness and so I will be careful about how I chat about things here.

I think that when Jesus said this generation will not pass way until all these things come to pass that he meant that generation that will be alive when the sign of the prophet Daniel, the abomination of desolation is revealed. So instead of trying to explain how Jesus already came back at the 70 AD judgment I think it is a future generation. We will find out.

 

[randyk]

Without holiness no man shall see the Lord. I am fully persuaded that Jesus taught that living a life of holiness and righteousness was necessary to eschatological salvation. To be ready for His Coming means having our lights burning with good works and bearing fruit. It means having no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness.

Of course not arguing with people about doctrines and interpretation and getting into immature sinful debates is part of that holiness and so I will be careful about how I chat about things here.

I think that when Jesus said this generation will not pass way until all these things come to pass that he meant that generation that will be alive when the sign of the prophet Daniel, the abomination of desolation is revealed. So instead of trying to explain how Jesus already came back at the 70 AD judgment I think it is a future generation. We will find out.

Thanks for the focus on holiness--we completely agree on that. I don't have a problem debating--just have to quit if the kitchen gets too hot!

 

[Dino246]

I believe that in his Olivet Discourse Jesus tried to focus his disciples away from the eschatological Coming as something to practically prepare for and instead focus on current issues that make one prepared for the Kingdom by moral means. In other words, Jesus made current issues the decisive matter that determine our preparation for the coming Kingdom, and not a matter of predicting when certain events would take place, and trying to second-guess when they would happen.

Jesus said that in his own generation his disciples should be prepared to deal with the ungodliness of the vast number of Jews, who were about to come under judgment in 70 AD. This means Christians were to avoid the sins of the Jews, and instead not partake with them in the sins that Jesus described.

When asked about his Coming, Jesus made it clear that it would be in his generation a non-eschatological coming in judgment, using the Romans to destroy the temple in Jerusalem. Instead of looking far off in the future to an indefinite event, they should be managing their lives now in a spiritual way, ensuring that they ready themselves morally. The sins of the Jews were to be understood as so serious that it would bring down both the temple and Jerusalem. And so, it was important for Christians to separate themselves from whatever these sins were.

When Jesus said his Coming would be like the Days of Noah, when people engaged in regular social activities, like marrying and eating, he was describing the NT age in general. Throughout the course of the Christian era, Christian peoples have gradually married back into paganism, and have become unaware of the loss of their of moral stature. Becoming attached to the sins of the world, these fallen Christians have become blind to the soon-coming judgment upon the whole world!

Many Christians turn Christianity into a cheap 1,2,3 formula for becoming a Christian, go to church, and then live out their lives with little change with respect to the paganism around them. Gradually, they become so compromised that their Christianity is little more than a platitude, or a one-line confession that "I believe that Christ is my justification." And so, they think their own righteousness is utterly unnecessary, or far less necessary than believing in Christ for their acceptance before God.

In reality, we do need to recognize what is just and what is unjust around us, and keep ourselves unspoiled from the paganism around us. If we can't see the difference, for what have we been saved? If we cannot recognize the satanic oppression around us, what do we hope to be saved from?

Can we really believe that Salvation has nothing to do with personal holiness? Or do we think that holiness is purely a form of legalism, without spiritual content? We should live by faith, and thus allow the righteousness of Christ to indwell us always so that we are reassured that we have escaped the judgment of God coming upon the world. We should be concerned about God's judgment today, because how we are judged today is how we will be judged at the end of the world!

In what sense are you using "eschatological"? The term simply refers to end-time events, which can legitimately refer to both the end of the age and to the end of the world. Matthew 24 is undoubtedly eschatological, but there is strong debate over whether it refers to the former or the latter, or some combination thereof.

 

[Amanuensis]

In what sense are you using "eschatological"? The term simply refers to end-time events, which can legitimately refer to both the end of the age and to the end of the world. Matthew 24 is undoubtedly eschatological, but there is strong debate over whether it refers to the former or the latter, or some combination thereof.

Maybe he is referring to the teaching that Jesus already came in that generation. A secret coming back at 70 AD.

 

[randyk]

In what sense are you using "eschatological"? The term simply refers to end-time events, which can legitimately refer to both the end of the age and to the end of the world. Matthew 24 is undoubtedly eschatological, but there is strong debate over whether it refers to the former or the latter, or some combination thereof.

"Eschatological" refers to the Last Days of this age, such as the 3.5 years of Antichrist, the Return of Jesus to bring his Kingdom to earth, the Millennium, etc.

 

[randyk]

Maybe he is referring to the teaching that Jesus already came in that generation. A secret coming back at 70 AD.

No, absolutely not. I've never said that. In fact, I've intentionally declared that that is *not* my position. In the OT Prophets the "day of the Lord" is used not just for the eschatological return of Christ at the end of the present age, but it is also used for historical judgments, such as the Assyrian and Babylonian invasions of Israel.

This is how I believe Jesus wished his "coming" to be viewed in part, as an imminent judgment upon Israel through the Roman armies. It was not a rejection of his eschatological Coming, but rather, a re-focus of more immediate needs in their immediate future. The need was to avoid a coming judgment upon Israel for their heinous crime of rejecting and murdering their Messiah. There was a more immediate need to repent of false religiosity, and a return to God and to true spirituality.

This was, I believe, Jesus' focus, and away from "prophetic calendars," used like Nostradamus to figure out timing puzzles, who is the Antichrist, etc. etc.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I believe that in his Olivet Discourse Jesus tried to focus his disciples away from the eschatological Coming as something to practically prepare for and instead focus on current issues that make one prepared for the Kingdom by moral means.

It would seem that you are trying to change the significance and content of the Olivet Discourse, since all of it is prophecy (eschatology). Prophecy does not replace the requirement for Christians to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world. The purpose of prophecy is to teach the people of God that God has a plan and purpose and that in the end sin and evil will be totally abolished from this universe, and righteousness and peace will prevail for eternity.

Christians should consider themselves privileged since they know in broad strokes how things are going to progress until the Second Coming of Christ, and then beyond to the New Heavens and the New Earth. The world in general is quite unaware of all this. Therefore the primary goal of the Church must be to go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature. And if the Gospel is preached fully, then the future reign of Christ on earth must also be included. Thus it becomes the Gospel of the Kingdom of God.

 

[Dino246]

"Eschatological" refers to the Last Days of this age, such as the 3.5 years of Antichrist, the Return of Jesus to bring his Kingdom to earth, the Millennium, etc.

I don't agree with your definition, but I can accept that's how you're using the term.

 

[randyk]

It would seem that you are trying to change the significance and content of the Olivet Discourse, since all of it is prophecy (eschatology). Prophecy does not replace the requirement for Christians to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world. The purpose of prophecy is to teach the people of God that God has a plan and purpose and that in the end sin and evil will be totally abolished from this universe, and righteousness and peace will prevail for eternity.

Well yes, biblical prophecy is both moral and instructs us about what we can expect in the future, as it regards our Salvation. But no, I'm not changing the significance and content of the Olivet Discourse. It being prophecy does not change whether it applies to things present or things future. The Prophet in the OT often addressed the current state of affairs, and not just some judgment or restoration to take place in the future.

At the heart of all prophecy is the exhortation to conform to God's moral image, and the encouragement to remain in spiritual unity with God. It isn't about information alone, like a class in history. Rather, it is an attempt to examine life in the light of our need to remain in spiritual unity with God, which is reinforced by moral behavior. Spirituality is ruined by immorality and wickedness.

The Olivet Discourse, as such, dealt with both present realities and future realities. The current reality involved Israel's poor spiritual state of being, including wickedness. Religious externals hid internal corruption and evil deeds done in secret. And Jesus was warning his generation that divine judgment was soon to roll in, punishing the nation as a whole, even though Christians were not being targeted for this judgment. They would, however, feel the consequences of what their nation would go through.

Jesus predicted that the nation had a hardened heart, and would not repent for the most part. He therefore warned the natioin in advance of certain judgment, in the hopes of bringing a few to repentance before judgment actually fell. And he indicated this national judgment would take place in that very generation, which took place in 70 AD.

Jesus also said that this imminent judgment would lead to an entire age of national punishment for the Jewish people, anticipating that Jewish religion would remain recalcitrant, allowing for only a small remnant to repent in each generation. This age-long punishment was thus a prophecy for what would happen in 40 years, as well as a prophecy for what would happen throughout the age for the Jewish people.

This message was, in fact, given before the cross and before the Gospel had become international. So it was directed directly to the Jewish People.

But this prophecy, as an age-long prophecy was presented as preliminary to the Kingdom of Messiah, which would come at an indeterminate time, set only by the Father. Christians therefore were to place more premium on their spirituality and morality today than on trying to predict *when* the Kingdom would actually arrive.

 

[randyk]

I don't agree with your definition, but I can accept that's how you're using the term.

I'm just giving you a very common definition off the cuff--if you have a different prophetic system you may apply the word "eschatological" differently. In general it applies to the "endtimes," depending on how you view that.

When a person wishes to distinguish between an eschatological Coming and a "Day of the Lord" fulfilled in history, it is like comparing the Babylonian Judgment with the Coming of Christ's Kingdom. One is fulfilled in history before the Eschaton and the other is fulfilled in the Eschaton.

The "Day of the Lord" and its various iterations are applied to a number of events in ancient Israel's history, including judgments and restorations. When God "visits" humanity, things happen in dramatic fashion, whether good or bad.