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

[Marty fox]

That's meaningless. Does that change the fact that the old covenant was made obsolete by the death of Christ? No.

Of course but Jesus was talking about the destruction of the temple in the Olivet discourse.

It ended at the cross but they still went on participating in the old covenant age practices so God but a physical end to it.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Of course but Jesus was talking about the destruction of the temple in the Olivet discourse.

So? What is your point?

It ended at the cross but they still went on participating in the old covenant age practices so God but a physical end to it.

Again, that is meaningless as it relates to when the old covenant actually ended and was made obsolete, which was at the cross. By trying to make 70 AD the end of the old covenant age, you are promoting something not taught anywhere in scripture. If there was such thing as an old covenant age, then it ended when Jesus died on the cross.

When Jesus comes in the future it will mark the end of this temporal age during which people get married and they die, which is how Jesus described "this age" (Luke 20:34-36). So, the end of the age in the Olivet Discourse is the end of this temporal age that we're still living in.

 

[Marty fox]

To clarify my position Revelation is the revelation of Jesus Christ as in who He is and what He did. Jesus is God and He ushered in the New Covenant. That is what Revelation is it also is about the events of 70AD and the end of our World.

 

[claninja]

No, that is not likely.

Agreed

Their perspective at that time means nothing. Jesus's perspective is what matters.

While Jesus’ teaching does matter, I disagree that trying to understanding the disciples perspective in these accounts means nothing.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

While Jesus’ teaching does matter, I disagree that trying to understanding the disciples perspective in these accounts means nothing.

Why is that? Are you somehow not aware that the disciples were mistaken about a number of things at that time? Should we go by their understanding at the time or by what Jesus understood instead? For example, the disciples at that time probably would have assumed the gathering of the elect would only involve the gathering of Jews, but they would later come to understand that the elect include Gentile believers.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Luke 12:38 And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

The Greek word there is "kai", which does not mean "or". The word "kai" should be translated as "AND" (meaning in addition to something) or "EVEN" (meaning namely, or specifically).

The parable was intended to include TWO comings of the Lord "in the second AND (kai) the third watch" - not just one coming. The lord in the parable was returning from the marriage feasts (PLURAL in the Greek). The Apostles understood it this way also, which is why they asked the Lord "speakest thou this parable unto US or even unto ALL? Christ's disciples would experience the second coming in their first-century time frame (the second watch), but there would be one more additional coming beyond that one (in the third watch). For those servants who would be found faithfully watching on BOTH those occasions, they would all be blessed.

Jesus will return to burn up the entire surface of the earth with fire just like the entire surface of the earth was flooded with water in Noah's day.

"The earth abideth forever". God has no intention of incinerating this entire planet in the future.

I agree that the final coming of Christ in our future will rid the planet of all remaining human evil at that time. But that doesn't apply to the planet itself. The dirt under our feet is not evil. Neither is it in need of being burned up to purify it. If Peter had wanted to say that the entire globe would be incinerated in 2 Peter 3:10-13, he would have used the word "kosmos" or "oikoumene" in that text - NOT "tes ges", which scripture usually applies specifically to the "land" of Israel - the promised land. "The earth and the works that are therein" (such as the Jerusalem temple) were burned up back in AD 70, which manifested Isaiah 65's "new heavens and new earth". Certain conditions that had existed in the heavens and the earth were changed back in AD 70 at "the ends of the ages" which Paul said had come upon them at that time (1 Cor. 10:11- written around AD 57).

...when the old covenant actually ended and was made obsolete, which was at the cross.

I'd pinpoint this transition to the New Covenant just a bit later on with its being launched at Christ's resurrection-day ascension and the "change in the priesthood" - but I agree that the official transition to the New Covenant did not begin in AD 70. God was merely "taking out the trash" in the AD 70 period by burning up all the features of a dead, decaying physical temple system.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

The Greek word there is "kai", which does not mean "or".

It usually means "and", but it can mean "or" and it does mean "or" in Luke 12:38. As if Jesus was talking about possibly coming at both the second watch and third watch? LOL! He only talked about coming once, so you make a fool out of Him to act as if He was talking about coming twice.

The word "kai" should be translated as "AND" (meaning in addition to something) or "EVEN" (meaning namely, or specifically).

Not in Luke 12:38. That makes complete nonsense out of the verse since Jesus only ever talked about coming again ONCE.

The parable was intended to include TWO comings of the Lord "in the second AND (kai) the third watch" - not just one coming.

LOL. Ridiculous! Nowhere else in scripture is that nonsense taught, but you think Jesus taught it in that verse? Get serious. I need to stop wasting time refuting 100% utter nonsense, so I'm not going to waste my time reading more of the nonsense that only you believe. You lone wolves with doctrines all to yourself are full of yourselves. You think you alone have the truth. You can't be any more arrogant than that. You think God reveals things only to you. No, He does not. Nowhere does it talk about Jesus coming again twice. It's impossible to take you seriously at all when you resort to this kind of complete nonsense.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Jesus only ever talked about coming again ONCE.

Jesus spoke to those in front of Him in Matthew 16:27-28 about His coming return with the angels, to give rewards to all according to their works. Some of these people He promised would still be alive to see that happen. This was a first-century second coming of Christ which would be "in like manner" as Christ's ascension into heaven in Acts 1. But Christ never limited His coming return to one occasion ONLY. You will never find a Scripture which states this limitation.

Jesus also described normal history on this planet still continuing even AFTER His second coming return. He said He would return "immediately after the tribulation of those days" (Matt. 24:29) of what He had just called the "great tribulation" in Matt. 24:21. This time would be like none before, and none after it. In other words, normal history with continued periodic episodes of tribulation for the saints would occur after that "great tribulation", but none of them would ever be like that previous "great tribulation" which had been "immediately" followed by Christ's return.

Zechariah 14:16 also speaks of the "year to year" progress of history among the nations after Christ's second coming return to the Mount of Olives in Zechariah 14:4-5.

Since Scripture predicts this progress of normal history still continuing AFTER Christ's second coming, and since "we must ALL stand before the judgment seat of Christ...", that means of necessity that a THIRD coming must take place in which you and I are to participate, since the second coming with its resurrection already took place back in AD 70 on the very day that Daniel 12:11-13 had predicted. Every saint who will have died since that AD 70 resurrection will participate in the final resurrection in our future. ALL the saints will eventually be resurrected. God never promised that this would be ONLY one simultaneous event. The words "First resurrection" in Revelation 20:5 preclude that. Since there was a "first resurrection", of necessity there must be at the very least a second one.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus spoke to those in front of Him in Matthew 16:27-28 about His coming return with the angels, to give rewards to all according to their works. Some of these people He promised would still be alive to see that happen. This was a first-century second coming of Christ which would be "in like manner" as Christ's ascension into heaven in Acts 1. But Christ never limited His coming return to one occasion ONLY. You will never find a Scripture which states this limitation.

Your nonsense bores me. It's just utterly ludicrous. Jesus is coming back from heaven once and it will be in like manner as He ascended there (visibly and bodily - Acts 1:9-11). He will appear for the second time (Hebrews 9:28) and never a third time. Matthew 16:28 has to do with His transfiguration which is described in the verses immediately following it. Some of the disciples standing there (Peter, James and John) witnessed Jesus being transfigured in all His glory which was a preview and foretaste of His future coming in glory which is our blessed hope (Titus 2:13).

Jesus also described normal history on this planet still continuing even AFTER His second coming return.

LOL. No. You have the unfortunate status of agreeing with both preterist and premill nonsense. Your doctrine is a complete mess and one you have all to yourself. It can't be taken seriously at all. So, I don't.

 

[3 Resurrections]

It usually means "and", but it can mean "or" and it does mean "or" in Luke 12:38.

No, the Greek word "kai" never means "or". There are two totally different Greek word options used for the word "or". Look it up. Christ's parable spoke of the Lord coming in both a second "AND (kai)" in a third watch in Luke 12:38. Many translations miss this point.

Jesus is coming back from heaven once and it will be in like manner as He ascended there (visibly and bodily - Acts 1:9-11). He will appear for the second time (Hebrews 9:28) and never a third time.

Of course any return of Christ involves a visible, bodily coming. But you are presuming that a third coming for Christ is excluded in Scripture - and it isn't. Give me the verse or text that states Christ would ONLY come once. Good luck finding one. There aren't any that put this restriction on the number of returns for Christ - not even the mention of the second coming in Hebrews 9:28.

Matthew 16:28 has to do with His transfiguration which is described in the verses immediately following it.

This is the typical dodge people employ to get out of the plain meaning of Matthew 16:27-28, with Christ's second coming return happening while some of those he was then speaking to were still alive to see it. Yours is an impossible interpretation. No rewards according to every man's works were handed out on the Mount of Transfiguration. No angels accompanied Christ at that time, and He was not "coming" on the Mount of Transfiguration - He never had left by then. And it was only supposed to be "some" of those Christ was speaking to who would be alive to see His coming. The vast majority would have died. Are you telling me that most of those people Christ was then speaking to, including the disciples, had died in those six days between Matthew 16:27-28 and the Mount of Transfiguration? That is also impossible. The Mount of Transfiguration was not supposed to portray Christ's second coming. Moses and Elijah were then discussing Christ's approaching death with Him, which He would accomplish at Jerusalem - not His return.

You yourself are not the intended target of my comments. I'm fully aware that you are set in your own interpretation of these things, and of the scorn with which you regard other views. But we are all playing to the gallery, so to speak. What I am presenting is not my own invention, but the texts themselves, which those who are reading from the sidelines are free to consider for themselves.

You have the unfortunate status of agreeing with both preterist and premill nonsense.

No one classification of eschatology viewpoints is 100% without some truth in its presentation. Don't get hung up on those classifications. My job is to take only the pieces of correct interpretation from each one, and combine them into a single paradigm which agrees totally with scripture, and has no internal contradictions within itself.

 

[claninja]

Why is that? Are you somehow not aware that the disciples were mistaken about a number of things at that time? Should we go by their understanding at the time or by what Jesus understood instead? For example, the disciples at that time probably would have assumed the gathering of the elect would only involve the gathering of Jews, but they would later come to understand that the elect include Gentile believers.

I think understanding the disciples misunderstandings is important for deriving context

Why is that? Are you somehow not aware that the disciples were mistaken about a number of things at that time? Should we go by their understanding at the time or by what Jesus understood instead? For example, the disciples at that time probably would have assumed the gathering of the elect would only involve the gathering of Jews, but they would later come to understand that the elect include Gentile believers.

At this point, They probably didn’t understand that Christ was going to go to heaven and then return. So when they asked about “sign of your coming”, were they asking about Christ coming in his kingdom/kingdom coming with power?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, the Greek word "kai" never means "or". There are two totally different Greek word options used for the word "or". Look it up. Christ's parable spoke of the Lord coming in both a second "AND (kai)" in a third watch in Luke 12:38. Many translations miss this point.

Wrong. It can mean "or", so stop acting as if you are the Ultimate Authority on the Greek language. You are not. You do not understand Greek better than the translators did. The word "kai" can mean "and also..." which is basically the same thing as saying "or" when used in conjunction with the word "if". So, Luke 12:38 can be understood to be saying this...

And if he shall come in the second watch, and also if he shall come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

When read like this what Jesus is saying that His servants will be blessed if Jesus finds them watching and expecting Him to come if He comes in the second watch and that would also be true if He comes in the third watch. So, it will be true if He comes in the second watch and also (or) will be true if He comes in the third watch. You are apparently not even looking at the context of the verse which is in relation to only ONE coming of Christ. Read the surrounding verses for the context....

Luke 12:36 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately. 37 Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them. 38 And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. 39 And this know, that if the goodman of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not have suffered his house to be broken through. 40 Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not.

How can you read this and think that Jesus was talking about coming twice? That is ludicrous. Look at verses 36 and 37. He is talking about coming once and compares it to returning from the wedding (preparations) and talking about His servants being blessed if they are expecting Him to come. That's it. Where do you get two comings of Christ from that? Nowhere. Does context mean nothing to you?

Read verses 39 and 40. How many comings of Christ are referenced there? One. Throughout the passage He is talking about His one future coming when He would return and He said He will come "at an hour when ye think not" and His servants will be blessed when He comes. See that? If He was talking about two future comings of Christ in verse 38 then He would have said that He will come at hours (plural) that we think not and not "an hour" (singular) when we think not.

So, your failure to look at the context of the verse is keeping you from seeing He was only talking about one future coming, not two.

 

[3 Resurrections]

How can you read this and think that Jesus was talking about coming twice? That is ludicrous. Look at verses 36 and 37. He is talking about coming once and compares it to returning from the wedding (preparations) and talking about His servants being blessed if they are expecting Him to come. That's it. Where do you get two comings of Christ from that? Nowhere. Does context mean nothing to you?

Of course I am looking at the context. I am looking at the Apostle Peter's question in verse 41, "Lord speakest thou this parable unto US or even to ALL?" There was going to be a coming of the Lord for the disciple Peter's generation in the first century, but after Christ's second coming in that generation ("in the second watch"), there was still a future blessing reserved also for those servants of the Lord who would be found faithfully watching for His next return "in the third watch".

This compares to the two marriage celebrations of Jacob to Leah and also Rachel. Jacob the keeper of sheep serves as one of the types of Christ the Shepherd. And in the Greek, that is marriage feastS (PLURAL) referred to in Luke 12:36. More than one marriage feast.

The word "kai" can mean "and also..." which is basically the same thing as saying "or" when used in conjunction with the word "if".

The words "and also" do not mean "or". It means "in addition to". In other words, two coming returns for Christ - not just one.

IF the Lord of those servants found them watching when He came in the second watch AND ALSO in the third watch, blessed were all those servants.

Wrong. It can mean "or", so stop acting as if you are the Ultimate Authority on the Greek language. You are not. You do not understand Greek better than the translators did

There are two and a half pages in my Greek / English lexicon devoted to the word "kai", and nowhere does it say that it can be employed as the word "or". None of the translators can claim infallibility any more than the rest of us. I do not base my interpretation of this Luke 12:38 verse as the lone source for believing that there are three comings of the Lord Jesus. Other Scriptures concur: once for Christ's earthly ministry, a second time in AD 70, and a third time in our future.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Of course I am looking at the context.

No, you're not. The context of Luke 12:36-40, which verse 38 is obviously part of, is in relation to ONE coming of Christ that He describes as returning from wedding preparations unexpectedly at an hour no one knows at which point He will bless those who were expecting Him.

In no way, shape or form did He talk about two different comings of Christ in that passage. That idea is utterly ludicrous and comes only from your very active imagination. You can't be taken seriously at all just as the few pre-tribs on here who try to claim there will be two raptures can't be taken seriously at all. Scripture never teaches the nonsense that you lone wolves have come up with in your imaginations.

 

[3 Resurrections]

In no way, shape or form did He talk about two different comings of Christ in that passage. That idea is utterly ludicrous and comes only from your very active imagination.

Why should this presentation of two returns of Christ be so offensive to you? The end results are just the same for both you and me - Christ bodily returns in our future to complete the bodily resurrection the saints, with a planet purified of all human evil from then onward. What is so ludicrous about Christ doing this in stages instead of all at one time? Particularly when it answers all the disputes over the verses which teach us concerning a first-century return of Christ which was "about to be" in that generation.

There are far too many texts in the Scriptures which present Christ coming to bodily resurrect the saints in the first century time frame. Do you really believe that God can only open the books for judgment on one occasion ONLY? There are no Scripture texts which put this limitation on God for one Great White Throne judgment ONLY.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Why should this presentation of two returns of Christ be so offensive to you?

It's offensive to me when someone twists God's word to make it say what they want it to say. The context of Luke 12:38 is clearly in relation to ONE return of Christ that will be unexpected and will be His return from making wedding preparations for His bride (us). Scripture says He will come from heaven ONCE in the future and He will come in like manner as He left (visibly and bodily). Scripture says He will appear the second time (Hebrews 9:28) and never a third time.

The end results are just the same for both you and me - Christ bodily returns in our future to complete the bodily resurrection the saints, with a planet purified of all human evil from then onward.

I'm glad you believe that, but it's never acceptable to me whenever any scripture is twisted like you are doing even if we do agree He will return in the future.

What is so ludicrous about Christ doing this in stages instead of all at one time?

Because that isn't taught in scripture. Do you care about interpreting scripture accurately?

Particularly when it answers all the disputes over the verses which teach us concerning a first-century return of Christ which was "about to be" in that generation.

There are far too many texts in the Scriptures which present Christ coming to bodily resurrect the saints in the first century time frame.

There are none which present that. You misinterpret scriptures to say that because of your lack of spiritual discernment. When He comes He is coming BODILY and He has clearly not done that yet. Stop believing nonsense. You wonder why this bothers me. It concerns me that if you believe nonsense like this then what other nonsense might you believe?

Do you really believe that God can only open the books for judgment on one occasion ONLY?

Why wouldn't it be on one occasion only? Do you think of God as a God who does not do things efficiently? Scripture teaches that He will judge all people at the same time when Jesus comes at the end of the age (Matthew 13:36-43, Matthew 13:47-50, Matthew 25:31-46).

There are no Scripture texts which put this limitation on God for one Great White Throne judgment ONLY.

You mean other than texts like Matthew 13:36-43, Matthew 13:47-50 and Matthew 25:31-46 which portray all people being judged at the same time? And texts like Daniel 12:2 and John 5:28-29 which have all of the dead being resurrected and then judged at the same time?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

At this point, They probably didn’t understand that Christ was going to go to heaven and then return. So when they asked about “sign of your coming”, were they asking about Christ coming in his kingdom/kingdom coming with power?

First of all, I don't think they actually asked what would be the sign of His coming and of the end of the age. I think that was Matthew's paraphrase of the second question they asked and I'll explain why.

Do you think they asked Jesus 2 or 3 questions? I assume you believe they asked Him 2 questions and that's what I believe, also.

Look at how the second question is recorded in Mark and Luke's accounts.

Mark 13:4 Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?

Luke 21:7 And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?

Very similar, right? But, very different from how the second question is recorded in Matthew 24:3.

Matthew 24:3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

So, with the question being recorded very similarly in 2 of the accounts and very differently in the other account compared to those 2 accounts, what was the second question that they actually asked? I lean towards believing it was similar to "And what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?". With "these things" being a reference to "these things" that Jesus said would be destroyed, which obviously were the temple buildings.

I believe they were asking for the sign that would indicate that the temple buildings were about to be destroyed since the last thing they were told before asking their questions was that the temple buildings would be destroyed. So, it makes sense that they would only have asked about that. I believe that they probably assumed that His coming with His angels when He would judge or reward everyone according to their works, as He had previously told them about (Matt 16:27, Luke 12:35-48, etc.) would occur at the same time that the temple buildings were destroyed and Jesus would have known that they assumed that and would want to correct that misunderstanding.

I think the reason why Matthew worded the second question differently was to help show that Jesus's answers would not only relate to the destruction of the temple buildings, but also to His second coming at the end of this temporal age. He talked about two different events and time periods in the Olivet Discourse since He was not obligated to answer according to the disciples' flawed understanding of the future at that time. One of His answers related to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple buildings in fulfillment of Daniel 9:26-27 and one was in relation to His future coming at the end of this temporal age at which point the angels will gather the elect, which refers to the church being gathered and caught up to Christ (1 Thess 4:14-17, 2 Thess 2:1), and when He will judge all people (Matt 25:31-46).

Jesus did not come in 70 AD. There was no gathering of the elect in 70 AD. There was no resurrection of the dead and no judgment like we see described in Matthew 25:31-46 in 70 AD. So, to interpret the whole Olivet Discourse as being all related to what happened in 70 AD just makes no sense at all.

 

[3 Resurrections]

Scripture says He will appear the second time (Hebrews 9:28)...

This is true.

...and never a third time.

This is your adding to Scripture. You will not find a chapter and verse for this limitation to ONLY a second coming .

Because that isn't taught in scripture. Do you care about interpreting scripture accurately?

Scripture does speak of the ranked order of resurrections in 1 Cor. 15:23. Christ was the First-fruits, and afterward, those who were His at His coming (the second coming of Hebrews 9:28). Many other Scriptures state the timing for this second coming and a resurrection that the New Testament writers testified was "about to be" in that first-century generation, just as Christ had predicted in Matt. 16:27-28 - while some of those people back then were still alive to see this return.

But the second coming was not supposed to be the period on the end of the sentence of history. It was a semi-colon.

Why wouldn't it be on one occasion only? Do you think of God as a God who does not do things efficiently? Scripture teaches that He will judge all people at the same time when Jesus comes at the end of the age (Matthew 13:36-43, Matthew 13:47-50, Matthew 25:31-46).

The Apostle Paul wrote that the "ends of the ages" had come upon them back then in 1 Cor. 10:11. Hebrews 1:2 called those first-century days "the last days", 1 John 2:18 wrote that "it is the last hour", and 1 Peter 4:7 said that "the end of all things is at hand" in his own days. God was about to sweep the dead, decaying remnants of the Old Covenant worship system into the trash and burn them to ashes in the AD 66-70 period.

You are correct that ALL the dead were to be judged in those texts that you brought up. But what you fail to grasp is that this was ALL the dead who had died up until AD 70 which were going to be judged, with rewards given to all according to their works. After that AD 70 judgment of ALL the dead, anyone who would die following the AD 70 return of Christ would also be required to stand before the judgment seat of Christ to be judged according to the things they had done in the body. This necessitates a third coming and a final resurrection and judgment for us in the future.

God set up the pattern for this three-stage resurrection process back under Mosaic law, with the three required harvest festivals of Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Tabernacles predicting the exact day on which God would stage three bodily resurrection events. Two of those group resurrection events have already occurred at Passover in AD 33 and AD 70's Pentecost day, leaving only the symbolism of the Feast of Tabernacles to be fulfilled in a final group resurrection to complete the pattern set up long ago.

I believe they were asking for the sign that would indicate that the temple buildings were about to be destroyed since the last thing they were told before asking their questions was that the temple buildings would be destroyed. So, it makes sense that they would only have asked about that. I believe that they probably assumed that His coming with His angels when He would judge or reward everyone according to their works, as He had previously told them about (Matt 16:27, Luke 12:35-48, etc.) would occur at the same time that the temple buildings were destroyed and Jesus would have known that they assumed that and would want to correct that misunderstanding.

Naaah, Jesus wasn't correcting anything. He was confirming the signs of His first-century coming in the disciples' own generation. This was exactly what He meant by giving the disciples that list of signs to look for in Luke 21:3-8-35. At the end of giving that list, Christ warned them in verse 36, "Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that are about to come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man."