Tweet
Was Jesus wrong when he predicted some would still be alive when he returns?
I'll give you my solution. I'm going to focus on Luke and Matthew since they seem to be drawing from the same tradition, unless this was just two different but similar teaching quotes that Jesus said at two different times, which is also possible (from the NASB)...
Matthew 16:27-28:
Luke 9:26-27:
The preterist argument is that both sentences is referring to the 70 AD war, and so it wasn't impossible that there were still some alive when this event happened even though it was 40 years after it was said.
There's a problem with that. How does the last sentence in Matthew (bolded) fit into that scenario? KJV translates it "reward" and that would seem to be the fitting Greek word. It also fits better within the context of Jesus's followers "taking up their cross" and sacrificing themselves towards his cause. In regards to Luke, what does being ashamed of Christ have to do with the war and the destruction of Jerusalem? The entire context of both doesn't work with the 70 AD war and is much more fitting as a final judgement.
IMO, the best explanation seems to be that the sentences are different and Jesus is speaking about two different things. In the first sentence, Jesus is referring to judgement upon his return; specifically the rewards that are given to the church after he gathers it. I believe this is also connected to the OD (i.e. Matthew 24:30-31 and Matthew ch.25).
In the second sentence, he's referring to something else. I believe it's possible the peterist interpretation is correct here and that he's referring to the war.
However, I think a much better interpretation is Jesus' ascension. During his trial before the Sanhedrin, all three gospels makes it pretty undeniable -- "You will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand" -- Jesus is referring specifically to this event.
What's especially interesting is that Matthew 26:64 and Mark -- "coming on the clouds" -- makes it clear he's citing the highly ambiguous passage in Daniel 7:13 (notice this is what really sets off the high priest since he understood perfectly the significance of that passage and what it implied), which I believe was also a past prophecy of Christ's ascension (The divine Son of Man -- bar enash). That passage in Daniel, btw, has stumped scholars abroad, both Jewish and secular, about it's meaning.
To summarize:
First sentence = Jesus' return.
Second sentence = Jesus' ascension.
I'll give you my solution. I'm going to focus on Luke and Matthew since they seem to be drawing from the same tradition, unless this was just two different but similar teaching quotes that Jesus said at two different times, which is also possible (from the NASB)...
Matthew 16:27-28:
For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every person according to his deeds.
“Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”
“Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”
For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when He comes in His glory and the glory of the Father and the holy angels.
But I say to you truthfully, there are some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.”
But I say to you truthfully, there are some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God.”
There's a problem with that. How does the last sentence in Matthew (bolded) fit into that scenario? KJV translates it "reward" and that would seem to be the fitting Greek word. It also fits better within the context of Jesus's followers "taking up their cross" and sacrificing themselves towards his cause. In regards to Luke, what does being ashamed of Christ have to do with the war and the destruction of Jerusalem? The entire context of both doesn't work with the 70 AD war and is much more fitting as a final judgement.
IMO, the best explanation seems to be that the sentences are different and Jesus is speaking about two different things. In the first sentence, Jesus is referring to judgement upon his return; specifically the rewards that are given to the church after he gathers it. I believe this is also connected to the OD (i.e. Matthew 24:30-31 and Matthew ch.25).
In the second sentence, he's referring to something else. I believe it's possible the peterist interpretation is correct here and that he's referring to the war.
However, I think a much better interpretation is Jesus' ascension. During his trial before the Sanhedrin, all three gospels makes it pretty undeniable -- "You will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand" -- Jesus is referring specifically to this event.
What's especially interesting is that Matthew 26:64 and Mark -- "coming on the clouds" -- makes it clear he's citing the highly ambiguous passage in Daniel 7:13 (notice this is what really sets off the high priest since he understood perfectly the significance of that passage and what it implied), which I believe was also a past prophecy of Christ's ascension (The divine Son of Man -- bar enash). That passage in Daniel, btw, has stumped scholars abroad, both Jewish and secular, about it's meaning.
To summarize:
First sentence = Jesus' return.
Second sentence = Jesus' ascension.
Comment