Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jesus said he was coming soon

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jesus said he was coming soon

    This my first post in a while...a long while. I've been having a real hard time with the way Jesus said he was coming soon. All the verses that speak of his return seem to indicate it was going to happen in the first century. I'm not looking for end times prophecy. I'm wondering how the text seems like it is imminent, yet it's been 2000 years. I have googled all over and none of the answers seem satisfactory. It's the, 1 day is a thousand years argument, those sorts of things. Can anyone direct me to a good explanation?

  • #2
    Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

    Originally posted by Semi-tortured View Post
    This my first post in a while...a long while. I've been having a real hard time with the way Jesus said he was coming soon. All the verses that speak of his return seem to indicate it was going to happen in the first century. I'm not looking for end times prophecy. I'm wondering how the text seems like it is imminent, yet it's been 2000 years. I have googled all over and none of the answers seem satisfactory. It's the, 1 day is a thousand years argument, those sorts of things. Can anyone direct me to a good explanation?
    Personally I think many take the 1 day is as a thousand years way to literal in application. All it is saying is that God's timing is not governed by how we view the passing of time. But regardless He is on time in everything He does.
    "He's wild, you know. Not like a tame lion."
    C.S. Lewis, "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe."

    "Oh, but sometimes the sun stays hidden for years"
    "Sometimes the sky rains night after night, When will it clear?"

    "But our Hope endures the worst of conditions"
    "It's more than our optimism, Let the earth quake"
    "Our Hope is unchanged"
    "Our Hope Endures" Natalie Grant

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

      That is why I turned to partial preterism.

      The first part of the Olivet Discourse deal with the Destruction of Jerusalem. The second part with the Second Coming. Matthew 25:14 says he went to a far country, and verse 19 says after a long time He returns. So the Destruction of Jerusalem was indeed first century, but His Second Coming in the distant future.

      Luke 20:9 says he went into a far country for a long time.

      The "quickly" passages in Revelation 22 could mean how (suddenly) He will come, not when. "Shortly must come to pass" verses in other parts of Revelation could mean the events may begin fulfillment shortly, not finish fulfillment. Historicism teaches Revelation covers the entire church history starting in John's time, to the Second Coming into Eternity, not confined to the last seven years before the End.
      "What then? ſhal we ſinne, becauſe we are not vnder the Law, but vnder grace? God forbid."


      Romaines vi.15 - 1560 Geneva Bible

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

        Originally posted by Semi-tortured View Post
        This my first post in a while...a long while. I've been having a real hard time with the way Jesus said he was coming soon. All the verses that speak of his return seem to indicate it was going to happen in the first century. I'm not looking for end times prophecy. I'm wondering how the text seems like it is imminent, yet it's been 2000 years. I have googled all over and none of the answers seem satisfactory. It's the, 1 day is a thousand years argument, those sorts of things. Can anyone direct me to a good explanation?
        When Christ says His coming is soon, or quickly, He doesn't mean His coming is imminent. But shows us the certainty of His return. His words of coming soon or quickly are a recurring phrase in Rev (2:16, 25; 22:7, 12; see also Zech. 2:10). Centuries have come and gone but we continue to pray "come Lord Jesus". There is no evidence as to when He will come, but a certain knowing that His return is without delay, for all things are progressing as the Kingdom of God is being completed. For this reason James tells us we must continue in patience knowing with blessed assurance that Christ will come again. And for those who are not looking for His coming it will come upon them suddenly and without warning. But to us who look for and patiently wait for His coming, it will not take us by surprise, for we know without doubt that the Lord will come again on the last day when the Kingdom of God through the message of the Gospel is complete.

        Jas*5:7 Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.

        1Th*5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
        1Th*5:2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
        1Th*5:3 For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.
        1Th*5:4 But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.
        1Th*5:5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.

        Blessings,
        RW

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

          Originally posted by Uncle Bud View Post
          That is why I turned to partial preterism.

          The first part of the Olivet Discourse deal with the Destruction of Jerusalem. The second part with the Second Coming. Matthew 25:14 says he went to a far country, and verse 19 says after a long time He returns. So the Destruction of Jerusalem was indeed first century, but His Second Coming in the distant future.

          Luke 20:9 says he went into a far country for a long time.

          The "quickly" passages in Revelation 22 could mean how (suddenly) He will come, not when. "Shortly must come to pass" verses in other parts of Revelation could mean the events may begin fulfillment shortly, not finish fulfillment. Historicism teaches Revelation covers the entire church history starting in John's time, to the Second Coming into Eternity, not confined to the last seven years before the End.
          So where is the cut off? The abomination of desolation...that's the first century and everything else is future? The problems really start to deepen for me when "generations" start to come up. Like Matthew 24:33-35

          33 So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. 34 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.

          It just seems like it is all the same conversation and train of thought. I have looked into Partial Preterism, and so much of that makes sense, especially when you take Revelation into account. I mean, Jesus speaks of his own second coming as sudden, like a thief in the night. If the things going down in Revelation are literal, I'm not sure how all the seals/trumpets could be going off and no one realizes what's coming.

          But I don't want this to become an End Times thread as there is a forum for that. But I felt that this is the biggest "hole" in the Bible for me and apologetics is more about answering the tough questions.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

            Matthew 24:1-35 is destruction of Jerusalem, rest of chapter and next is Second Coming.
            "What then? ſhal we ſinne, becauſe we are not vnder the Law, but vnder grace? God forbid."


            Romaines vi.15 - 1560 Geneva Bible

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

              Originally posted by Uncle Bud View Post
              That is why I turned to partial preterism.

              The first part of the Olivet Discourse deal with the Destruction of Jerusalem. The second part with the Second Coming. Matthew 25:14 says he went to a far country, and verse 19 says after a long time He returns. So the Destruction of Jerusalem was indeed first century, but His Second Coming in the distant future.

              Luke 20:9 says he went into a far country for a long time.

              The "quickly" passages in Revelation 22 could mean how (suddenly) He will come, not when. "Shortly must come to pass" verses in other parts of Revelation could mean the events may begin fulfillment shortly, not finish fulfillment. Historicism teaches Revelation covers the entire church history starting in John's time, to the Second Coming into Eternity, not confined to the last seven years before the End.
              I to have turned to PP (Partial Preterism)
              A cannot be A & not A at the same time.

              מקום כניעה סך הכל

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

                Originally posted by bluesky22 View Post
                I to have turned to PP (Partial Preterism)
                If it weren't for a few passages I would be a full Preterist.
                "What then? ſhal we ſinne, becauſe we are not vnder the Law, but vnder grace? God forbid."


                Romaines vi.15 - 1560 Geneva Bible

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

                  How does 2 Peter 3:4 tie into the disproving of 6,000 year limit?
                  "What then? ſhal we ſinne, becauſe we are not vnder the Law, but vnder grace? God forbid."


                  Romaines vi.15 - 1560 Geneva Bible

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

                    You sound like the church in Thessalionca who were all nuts when people started to die and Jesus had not yet returned. It had become such a problem that Paul had to write a letter about this. Read 2 Thess and you will see we need not worry about this like its an impending doom. He encourages the church and us in 2 Thess 3:13 to simple by busy waiting
                    Amazzin

                    Obedience to God is more than a soldier obeying his commander. It is our grateful response to the Lover of our souls.

                    CHURCH: Where worship is enjoyed, not endured - Grace is preached, not legalism - And Christ is exalted, not religion!



                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

                      Originally posted by Semi-tortured View Post
                      This my first post in a while...a long while. I've been having a real hard time with the way Jesus said he was coming soon. All the verses that speak of his return seem to indicate it was going to happen in the first century. I'm not looking for end times prophecy. I'm wondering how the text seems like it is imminent, yet it's been 2000 years. I have googled all over and none of the answers seem satisfactory. It's the, 1 day is a thousand years argument, those sorts of things. Can anyone direct me to a good explanation?
                      Two points. Stay with the 1 day = 1,000 year argument for a moment. Using that argument the early days (day 1 & 2) were when God dealt with man in general. That didn't work out so in the middle days (day 3 & 4) He called out Israel and worked with them to expect Jesus. That didn't work out either so in the last days ( day 5 & 6) He called out the church. That also didn't work so well all of which proves why we need grace and Jesus blood. But we are in the last days and so by that terminology Jesus is coming soon.

                      God created time for man. God does not experience time and neither does Jesus. When you consider eternity, a few thousand years is but a fraction of a second.

                      By the way, the 7th day will be the millennial reign of Jesus.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

                        Originally posted by Uncle Bud View Post
                        That is why I turned to partial preterism.

                        The first part of the Olivet Discourse deal with the Destruction of Jerusalem. The second part with the Second Coming.
                        Several problems with this argument.
                        1) Vs 15 specifically speaks of the Aof D "standing" in the Holy Place. This did not occur in 70 AD.

                        2) Vs 21 requires the mentioned future great tribulation to be the worst ever or ever would be again. 70 AD is not greater than the great tribulation of Revelation.

                        3) In Vs 29 Jesus says He will come "immediately" after the tribulation of those days and gather His elect. This did not happen in 70 AD.

                        Matthew 25:14 says he went to a far country, and verse 19 says after a long time He returns. So the Destruction of Jerusalem was indeed first century, but His Second Coming in the distant future.

                        Luke 20:9 says he went into a far country for a long time.
                        Another example where people add their own interpretation and claim it as fact. The parable in question is about the talents and says the Kingdom of God "is as" a man who went into a far country. Here Jesus is using a parable to show how God will judge the world and you make it about the time between Jesus leaving and return.


                        The "quickly" passages in Revelation 22 could mean how (suddenly) He will come, not when. "Shortly must come to pass" verses in other parts of Revelation could mean the events may begin fulfillment shortly, not finish fulfillment. Historicism teaches Revelation covers the entire church history starting in John's time, to the Second Coming into Eternity, not confined to the last seven years before the End.
                        If you say so. As I read Revelation I find that each vision has it's own time line. Don't know what "Historicism has to do with it. Bot Jesus and John refer to the book as prophesy and that is how I take it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

                          Originally posted by CurtTN View Post
                          Two points. Stay with the 1 day = 1,000 year argument for a moment. Using that argument the early days (day 1 & 2) were when God dealt with man in general. That didn't work out so in the middle days (day 3 & 4) He called out Israel and worked with them to expect Jesus. That didn't work out either so in the last days ( day 5 & 6) He called out the church. That also didn't work so well all of which proves why we need grace and Jesus blood. But we are in the last days and so by that terminology Jesus is coming soon.

                          God created time for man. God does not experience time and neither does Jesus. When you consider eternity, a few thousand years is but a fraction of a second.

                          By the way, the 7th day will be the millennial reign of Jesus.
                          Did Jesus have to return around 2000 to be at end of "6th day"?
                          "What then? ſhal we ſinne, becauſe we are not vnder the Law, but vnder grace? God forbid."


                          Romaines vi.15 - 1560 Geneva Bible

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

                            Originally posted by CurtTN View Post
                            Several problems with this argument.
                            1) Vs 15 specifically speaks of the Aof D "standing" in the Holy Place. This did not occur in 70 AD.

                            2) Vs 21 requires the mentioned future great tribulation to be the worst ever or ever would be again. 70 AD is not greater than the great tribulation of Revelation.

                            3) In Vs 29 Jesus says He will come "immediately" after the tribulation of those days and gather His elect. This did not happen in 70 AD.

                            Another example where people add their own interpretation and claim it as fact. The parable in question is about the talents and says the Kingdom of God "is as" a man who went into a far country. Here Jesus is using a parable to show how God will judge the world and you make it about the time between Jesus leaving and return.
                            If you say so. As I read Revelation I find that each vision has it's own time line. Don't know what "Historicism has to do with it. Bot Jesus and John refer to the book as prophesy and that is how I take it.
                            Hi Curt: I'm afraid we're going to have a few differences, but I love hearing from you and factoring into my thinking your views. Please feel free to be a "opinionated" as you like. The stronger the assertion the more you invite a balanced perspective.

                            I wouldn't say I'm a Partial Preterist but I do have the conviction that the main focus of the Olivet Discourse was on the historical destruction of the temple in 70 AD. That being said, there was a question as well about Jesus' Coming? So I believe there were two emphases by Jesus--one on the destruction of the temple in 70 AD and one on Jesus' Coming.

                            I'm not a Preterist because I don't believe Jesus actually *came* in 70 AD. And I *do* believe in a future Antichrist and in his 3.5 years reign. Furthermore, I believe in Israel's national and spiritual restoration after Jesus' returns.

                            Clearly, not everything got fulfilled in the 1st generation after Jesus' death. What I actually believe is that Jesus suggested a great tribulation for the Jews would only *begin* in his days. Since the Jewish diaspora was already in play at that time what Jesus meant was that the beginning stirrings of a greater tribulation were on the horizon. Like a tree budding new leaves in Spring, and like a pregnant mother about to give birth, this tribulation was coming for the Jews in the form of a Roman invasion.

                            So, in the 1st Jewish War 66-70 AD (though ongoing), this great tribulation actually began, in my thinking. The temple ultimately was destroyed. But Jesus indicated that great tribulation would continue for the Jews throughout this age.

                            Furthermore, Christians would suffer as well from the hostile state of the world, both towards Jews and Christians. This tribulational era would only be completed at the Coming of Christ. And somewhere, just before Christ comes back, there will be a confederation of 10 nations under the Antichrist who will severely persecute Christians in at least some areas of the world. I *know* you are Postribulational!

                            But go ahead and express any objections you may have?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Jesus said he was coming soon

                              Originally posted by randyk View Post
                              Hi Curt: I'm afraid we're going to have a few differences, but I love hearing from you and factoring into my thinking your views. Please feel free to be a "opinionated" as you like. The stronger the assertion the more you invite a balanced perspective.

                              I wouldn't say I'm a Partial Preterist but I do have the conviction that the main focus of the Olivet Discourse was on the historical destruction of the temple in 70 AD. That being said, there was a question as well about Jesus' Coming? So I believe there were two emphases by Jesus--one on the destruction of the temple in 70 AD and one on Jesus' Coming.

                              I'm not a Preterist because I don't believe Jesus actually *came* in 70 AD. And I *do* believe in a future Antichrist and in his 3.5 years reign. Furthermore, I believe in Israel's national and spiritual restoration after Jesus' returns.

                              Clearly, not everything got fulfilled in the 1st generation after Jesus' death. What I actually believe is that Jesus suggested a great tribulation for the Jews would only *begin* in his days. Since the Jewish diaspora was already in play at that time what Jesus meant was that the beginning stirrings of a greater tribulation were on the horizon. Like a tree budding new leaves in Spring, and like a pregnant mother about to give birth, this tribulation was coming for the Jews in the form of a Roman invasion.

                              So, in the 1st Jewish War 66-70 AD (though ongoing), this great tribulation actually began, in my thinking. The temple ultimately was destroyed. But Jesus indicated that great tribulation would continue for the Jews throughout this age.

                              Furthermore, Christians would suffer as well from the hostile state of the world, both towards Jews and Christians. This tribulational era would only be completed at the Coming of Christ. And somewhere, just before Christ comes back, there will be a confederation of 10 nations under the Antichrist who will severely persecute Christians in at least some areas of the world. I *know* you are Postribulational!

                              But go ahead and express any objections you may have?
                              If I grasp your point, it is that the GT began in 70 AD and has continued and will continue through the second coming. Is that correct?

                              My first objection to that thought is that it seems more like an assumption designed to support the PP position than one based on strict reading of scripture. I don't recall any scripture that suggests we are in the tribulation now and it makes the second half of Daniel's 70th week of little import. While this position may get you around my point 3 it does not help with points 1 & 2.

                              What verse suggests that Jesus "indicated" that the GT would continue through this age?

                              My biggest problem with the OD and the 70 AD links is that most people that see the temple destruction in Matt 24 is solely because of verses 1 & 2. Here Jesus and disciples are actually AT the temple but in verse 3 till the end of the total discussion they are on the M of O. Now they clearly had to walk there and it took some time and we can assume they continued talking about all sorts of things including the end times. Now reread verse 3 and see if you see as I do, that without the misleading of verse 1 & 2 there is nothing in 3 that ties back to the temple destruction discussion. That is why I conclude that 24 is all about end times.

                              Your turn my friend!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X