What were the disciples asking when they inquired about “what will be the sign of your coming”?

[claninja]

In the olivet discourse of Matthew, when the disciples asked “what will be the sign of your coming?”, did they already fully comprehend at this point that Christ was going to go ascend to heaven and then return?

in other words, IF, at the time of the Olivet discourse, the disciples did not know that Christ was going to ascend to heaven and then at a future point, return, then why should the question, FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE” be understood as “what will be the sign of your return”?

 

[MatthewG]

In the olivet discourse of Matthew, when the disciples asked “what will be the sign of your coming?”, did they already fully comprehend at this point that Christ was going to go ascend to heaven and then return?

in other words, IF, at the time of the Olivet discourse, the disciples did not know that Christ was going to ascend to heaven and then at a future point, return, then why should the question, FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE” be understood as “what will be the sign of your return”?

Hi Claninja,

I would say not at that current time. Was all the disciples there, or only a few?

After his ascension and the holy spirit for them perform miracles, they went forth explaining it afterward.

There is a lot in Revelation for sure. It was most certainly a progression, and there are also Parables, which concerned "The wicked farmers," and what would happen to the them.

 

[Marty fox]

Hi Claninja,

I would say not at that current time. Was all the disciples there, or only a few?

After his ascension and the holy spirit for them perform miracles, they went forth explaining it afterward.

There is a lot in Revelation for sure. It was most certainly a progression, and there are also Parables, which concerned "The wicked farmers," and what would happen to the them.

Only these four were there.

Mark 13
3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4 “Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”

Surprising enough none of them actually recorded any of the three recorded the Olivit Discourse.

 

[Marty fox]

In the olivet discourse of Matthew, when the disciples asked “what will be the sign of your coming?”, did they already fully comprehend at this point that Christ was going to go ascend to heaven and then return?

in other words, IF, at the time of the Olivet discourse, the disciples did not know that Christ was going to ascend to heaven and then at a future point, return, then why should the question, FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE” be understood as “what will be the sign of your return”?

At the time they probably didn't fully under that Jesus was talking about His coming in judgement not the actual second coming. Thats why Jesus was explaining it to them it was the end of the temple and sacrificial age.

 

[MatthewG]

Only these four were there.

Mark 13
Peter, James, John and Andrew

Surprising enough none of them actually recorded any of the three recorded the Olivit Discourse.

What do you mean by none of them actually recorded any of the three recorded the Olivet Discourse.

They wouldn't have had to, they would have been preaching it, however there are found in their writings, concerning an overall expansion of it, especially Revelation.

By your comment I suggest you are just simply saying they didnt record it within their writings.

However, they did expound upon the return of Jesus. They encouraged their audience right?

Paul had to have heard about it, and he even expounded on those whom were saying it had already passed that it had not yet quite came yet to continue to be patient and wait.





That is the point I get to... is did audience written to in any of the letters outside the Gospel matter. And honestly some people believe the Revelation should be removed or not heeded, and some of the Apostles were wrong.

 

[MatthewG]

I heard of a person who I've known for a long time, who explained the way he believed to another person.


That person was upset saying below.

"I wanted to be ascending into the sky, so my neighbor could see me get chosen over them." (Seen way to many movies, or read to many left behind series books.) How is this even of the Spirit?

That was the reply, all because he believe Jesus has already came just as the Bible proclaimed he would...

So it does seem to mess people up, because people have such an avid hope of this second coming - coming now today...

When you actually read the bible... It's contextually sound, and it continues to progress up to the great and dreadful day of the LORD, and Yeshua coming back to get his bride.... However people either.

1. Do not read.
2. Listen to what the pastor man or woman says.
3. Do not care.
4. Traditionally have been taught that Jesus is coming soon, and you better be ready over and over and over again, and never learning the context.
5. Misquote scripture, without consideration of the main audience.
6. Misquote scripture to fit the narrative in the way they would desire it to be, suggesting that this return is for us today.



When Jesus, stated none of this generation shall pass away, until all had come about...



So... where do you take it?

 

[Randy Kluth]

In the olivet discourse of Matthew, when the disciples asked “what will be the sign of your coming?”, did they already fully comprehend at this point that Christ was going to go ascend to heaven and then return?

in other words, IF, at the time of the Olivet discourse, the disciples did not know that Christ was going to ascend to heaven and then at a future point, return, then why should the question, FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE” be understood as “what will be the sign of your return”?

NT Eschatology and its conception derives from Dan 7, where we are told the Son of Man descends from the clouds of heaven to save God's People from the Antichrist. The Jews are a people who have had to fight for their purity and for their existence against internal and external forces that wish to divert them from their goal to be a nation of God.

So, it was understood from the Prophets that a time must come when it will all end, when they can truly say, "Never again will be be cast out of our land." The coming of Messiah was understood from the Prophets, but Jesus' response came from Dan 7, where the Messiah comes as the "Son of Man" to bring about his Kingdom and final deliverance.

Jesus' Disciples were stunned by the sense that Jesus would appear to fail to bring in God's Kingdom, and ignored his explicit claim that he must die. So, when he said the Temple would be destroyed, they were befuddled--how can the Messiah fail to come and establish his Kingdom?

So, when they asked when Jesus would "come," they were referring to his "coming" in the sense of realizing his Messianic mission, which had to do with establishing God's Kingdom and saving God's People. It's more like, "I know you've come, and you're here, but when are you *really* going to come and be who you're designed to be?

 

[MatthewG]

NT Eschatology and its conception derives from Dan 7, where we are told the Son of Man descends from the clouds of heaven to save God's People from the Antichrist. The Jews are a people who have had to fight for their purity and for their existence against internal and external forces that which to divert them from their goal to be a nation of God. So, it was understood from the Prophets that a time must come when it will all end, when they can truly say, "Never again will be be cast out of our land."

The coming of Messiah was understood from the Prophets, but Jesus' response came from Dan 7, where the Messiah comes as the "Son of Man" to bring about his Kingdom and final deliverance.

This is what Ai analysis states:

NT Eschatology refers to the study of "last things" or the end times as presented in the New Testament of the Bible. It explores concepts like the Second Coming of Jesus, resurrection of the dead, judgment, heaven and hell, and the ultimate destiny of humanity and creation.

The Word of God wasn't even Jesus yet in Daniel 7. Besides that you got other books to consider.

 

[claninja]

Hi Claninja,

I would say not at that current time. Was all the disciples there, or only a few?

After his ascension and the holy spirit for them perform miracles, they went forth explaining it afterward.

There is a lot in Revelation for sure. It was most certainly a progression, and there are also Parables, which concerned "The wicked farmers," and what would happen to the them.

So if they didn’t have the understanding that Christ was to ascend and then return, at the time of the Olivet discourse, what were the disciples asking in vs 3?

 

[MatthewG]

So if they didn’t understand that Christ was to ascend and then return, at the time of the Olivet discourse, what were the disciples asking?

About the end of the age which they lived in.

 

[MatthewG]

@claninja,

Do you remember when a few disciples went with Jesus up on the mountain and seen his transfiguration.

He stated "do not tell anyone of it until resurrection" or something, close to that.

Who knows if Jesus when he resurrected, didn't expound upon what he was saying to them in that day so they would understand.

It's not out of the realm of possibility.

 

[claninja]

About the end of the age which they lived in.

“The sign of your coming” - what does this mean, if the disciples didnt yet understand that Christ was to ascend and then return.

 

[claninja]

@claninja,

Do you remember when a few disciples went with Jesus up on the mountain and seen his transfiguration.

He stated "do not tell anyone of it until resurrection" or something, close to that.

Who knows if Jesus when he resurrected, didn't expound upon what he was saying to them in that day so they would understand.

It's not out of the realm of possibility.

the resurrection takes place after the olivet discourse.

 

[claninja]

Can you tell me? -- Why does it matter, if they did understand or did not yet understand?

Jesus could have expounded upon it when he was resurrected to them, but his words are enough for us to see, and see the afterward in the other letters that we have.

I think they were probably referring to Christ coming into his kingdom/the kingdom of God coming with power, without fully knowing that Christ was going to ascend and then return.

 

[MatthewG]

I think they were probably referring to Christ coming into his kingdom/the kingdom of God coming with power, without fully knowing that Christ was going to ascend and then return.

Okay. I thought that was what I had said in my first writing but maybe I didnt. It was the end of the age.

 

[claninja]

What difference does that make?

To me it makes absolutely no difference. You got three accounts that report the end of the age, but if you say....


Well they didn't understand.


I guess Jesus didn't understand either.


He was just saying random things for no reason at this point of the conversation.

the point is, I’m trying to understand their question from their perspective.

 

[MatthewG]

the point is, I’m trying to understand their question from their perspective.

Okay, thank you for addressing this. I would tell you go and read, and start from Matthew 21-24.

Also read Mark 10-13.

Also read Luke 19 - 21.

The question was concerning the end of the age.

 

[Marty fox]

What do you mean by none of them actually recorded any of the three recorded the Olivet Discourse.

They wouldn't have had to, they would have been preaching it, however there are found in their writings, concerning an overall expansion of it, especially Revelation.

By your comment I suggest you are just simply saying they didnt record it within their writings.

However, they did expound upon the return of Jesus. They encouraged their audience right?

Paul had to have heard about it, and he even expounded on those whom were saying it had already passed that it had not yet quite came yet to continue to be patient and wait.





That is the point I get to... is did audience written to in any of the letters outside the Gospel matter. And honestly some people believe the Revelation should be removed or not heeded, and some of the Apostles were wrong.

I was saying that Matthew, Mark and Luke recorded the Olivet Discourse in their gospels and neither of them were present when Jesus gave it. John was present but he didn't record it in his gospel. It wasn't the actual second coming of Jesus it was the coming in judgment by Jesus in 70AD.

But I do believe that the book of Revelation written by John is in a roundabout way a different summery of the symbolic events of the Olivet Discourse though.

 

[MatthewG]

I was saying that Matthew, Mark and Luke recorded the Olivet Discourse in their gospels and neither of them were present when Jesus gave it. John was present but he didn't record it in his gospel. It wasn't the actual second coming of Jesus it was the coming in judgment by Jesus in 70AD.

But I do believe that the book of Revelation written by John is in a roundabout way a different summery of the symbolic events of the Olivet Discourse though.

I think it does support his coming. He would fall in place with what was said in Malachi. If Jesus didn't save his bride in that day in age, to me he would be a failure. I believe he did so, faithfully. Regardless of the massive push back from sincere believers..

 

[Randy Kluth]

This is what Ai analysis states:

NT Eschatology refers to the study of "last things" or the end times as presented in the New Testament of the Bible. It explores concepts like the Second Coming of Jesus, resurrection of the dead, judgment, heaven and hell, and the ultimate destiny of humanity and creation.

The Word of God wasn't even Jesus yet in Daniel 7. Besides that you got other books to consider.

Jesus preexisted his human spirit as the Word of God, who had been "with God" and "was God." So, let's not go there?

I did consider books other than Daniel with respect to Messianic expectation. Messianic expectation is ingrained within the biblical books because they pointed towards the ultimate resolve of the Sin Problem.

But the notion of the Son of Man coming with the clouds of heaven came from Dan 7. A number of elements derived from Dan 7 are found in NT eschatology.

The idea of deliverance from heaven and from Messiah are elsewhere in the Prophets, but I find Daniel to be special. Jesus specifically references Daniel in his Olivet Discourse (or the authors do).

May I remind you that the question asked about the "sign" of the Son of Man's coming? The sign, according to Jesus, was his coming *from heaven,* or with the "clouds of heaven." This came from Dan 7.

The idea was that nations and men will never be able to achieve the Kingdom of God, just as Adam and Eve could not reenter the Garden and eat from the Tree of Life. The only way they can do this is if the Kingdom *comes to them from heaven.*

There is not earthly sign of Jesus' Coming. He was crucified. But he is coming again from heaven.