Coming, Presence, or Nearness?

It was just two days before Passover and his death, sometime around midnight, when Jesus and his Apostles left Jerusalem and crossed the Valley of Cedars (Kidron), and then they walked up the Mount of Olives and sat down in a quiet spot. And as they looked at the marvelous Temple of Jehovah in the light of the full moon, some of his Apostles commented on the magnificence of these buildings. Then Jesus said, ‘Do you see all these things? I tell you the truth, there won’t be a stone left on top of a stone here that won’t be thrown down.’

Then, just after Jesus had foretold the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (as recorded in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21), Jesus’ Apostles asked him to tell them when the thing he had just foretold would happen. It’s important for us to understand exactly what they asked, because this will help us to understand the meaning of his reply better, which may have to do with the end of this period that we are now living in.

We have three different accounts of these words, one by Matthew (who may have been an eyewitness), and one each by Mark and Luke, who probably heard what Jesus said from Apostles who were the actual eye witnesses. And because the words expressed in each case are slightly different, we can see what the Apostles really understood him to mean, not what the words are thought to mean in a single verse.

In Greek, Matthew 24:3 reads, ‘Eipon hemin pote tauta estai kai ti to semion tes ses parousias kai synteleias tou aionos.’ Word-for-word in English, that reads, ‘Say to/us when these will/be and what the sign at/the your being/next/to and ending the age.’

In Greek, Mark 13:4 reads, ‘Eipon hemin pote tauta estai kai ti to semion hotan melle tauta synteleisthai panta.’ Word-for-word in English, that reads, ‘Say to/us when these will/be and what the sign when may/be/about these ending all.’

In Greek, Luke 21:7 reads, ‘Didaskale, pote oun tauta estai kai to to semion hotan melle tauta ginesthai.’ Word-for-word in English, this reads, ‘Teacher, say therefore these will/be and what the sign when may/be/about these begin.’

We find the Greek word parousias (which is only used in the Matthew account) is used in similar context at 1 Corinthians 15:23, 1 Thessalonians 2:19, 3:13, 4:15, 5:23, 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 9, James 5:7, 8, 2 Peter 1:16, 3:4, 12, and at 1 John 2:28. So, we suspect that all these scriptures are referring to the same period in time. But, when is that, and how should parousias be properly translated?

Well, some Bibles have translated the word parousias at Matthew 24:3 as coming, but the problem with this is that the Greek word for coming is erchomenon… which doesn't have the same meaning as parousias. However, if you look at the Hebrew and Aramaic texts, you’ll see that the words he spoke in either language (aram. metitak) translate as coming or arrival. So, although much has been written about the meaning and significance of the Greek word parousias, it probably wasn't the word that Jesus actually used, for it is thought that he spoke in Aramaic (not Greek).

Now, it is true that at least one Bible translates parousias as presence, which is good, because the English word presence is derived from parousias (if that truly was the proper word spoken by Jesus). And if we were to conclude that Jesus’ Apostles actually asked about his parousias, we would then assume that the Apostles were asking Jesus when he would be present or have already arrived, not for just signs that he was about to come. So, what did the Apostles really ask?

Well, if you read the same account (about the question that was asked) in the books of Mark and Luke (as shown above), you’ll see that Mark quoted them as asking when these things were about to be, and in Luke they asked what the signs were when the destruction of God’s Temple was about to begin. In other words, they were asking what the signs would be when the things that Jesus was foretelling (his coming) were about to happen, not when he had already arrived. So, there is no mention of a parousia in either account!

As further proof, note that in the Aramaic text of Mark, Jesus’ Apostles were quoted as saying, ‘Tell us when these things will happen and what is the sign that these things are near and all these things will be fulfilled?’ And in Luke he was quoted as saying, ‘When will these things be, and what is the sign that these things are near to happening?’

Also, notice Jesus’ words at Matthew 24:33, where he said, ‘Likewise, when you see all these things [happening], know that he’s near – at the doors.’ So, the signs that Jesus gave weren’t the signs of the end, but of when they were ‘about to end.’ And at the conclusion of the period when these signs are seen, Jesus will be ‘present,’ ‘have arrived,’ or have ‘come’ to bring the foretold destruction.

We read of the events of Jesus’ coming (gr. ercomi) starting at Matthew 24:29. And since these prophecies were never fulfilled during the destruction of Jerusalem, they must specifically refer to a modern and greater series of events to come upon the whole world. Then throughout the rest of Matthew 24 and 25, Jesus talks about this period of his coming, which appears to apply to the events that include (or lead up to) Armageddon.

When Will Jesus Arrive?

Notice another interesting difference between the accounts of what the Apostles asked. In Matthew, the question was more complex, for they not only asked about the signs of when he would arrive, but when the age would end. However, both in Mark and Luke it appears as though they were just asking when the Temple would be destroyed. And then Luke (in particular) recorded just the signs leading up to the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.

Now, in the case of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple, most of the signs that Jesus gave did in fact happen toward the latter half of the First Century. So could we say that Jesus arrived then? Yes, he must have played an active role in the destruction of Jerusalem, because that’s what he said in his prophecy. That this assumption is true can be seen in Jesus’ instructions to his Apostles when he first sent them out to preach. Notice that a short period is implied in his words found at Matthew 10:23; ‘When they persecute you in this city, run to another. Because, I tell you the truth, you may not call on all the cities of Israel before the Son of Man arrives.’

But, were those things to have a greater fulfillment in the future… possibly in our day?

Many Bible scholars have concluded that the answer is no, and the prophecy was completely fulfilled on Jerusalem in 70-C.E., because Luke’s account seems to verify that idea. Yet, those who disagree with this view refer back to the same question Jesus’ Apostles asked, to prove there will be a future fulfillment. For other Bibles quote the Apostles as asking, ‘What will be the signs of your coming and the end of the world?’ And since ‘the world’ hasn’t ended yet, they argue that Jesus’ prophecy has still to be fulfilled completely.

However, while we agree with the belief that there will be a greater fulfillment of this prophecy, their argument isn’t totally valid, because Jesus didn’t actually say anything about the end of the world. If you go back and read the Greek words, you'll see that he didn’t speak of the end of the cosmos (world), but of the end of the aionos (age… a word that those Bibles also wrongly translate as forever, world, or system of things).

Although the age of Jewish worship at the Temple in Jerusalem did end in 70-C.E., we think that that the signs leading to the coming of Jesus will have a second fulfillment because of what is said at Revelation 6:2-7, where we read, ‘And at that {Look!} I saw a white horse, and the one who was sitting on it had a bow. He was given a crown and he came to conquer and to complete his victory… a fire-red horse came out, and … he was authorized to take peace away from the earth … a black horse … a greenish-yellow horse … and the grave came following him.’

This familiar scripture, which was written almost thirty years after the destruction of Jerusalem, was obviously speaking of some then-future event, and it foretold the same things that Jesus foretold in Matthew 24, a period marked by war, famine, sickness, and death. So we must conclude that Jesus’ prophecy does have a future (and global) fulfillment. But when?

Two Comings?

Some have argued that there are two comings of Jesus; a heavenly coming and a later earthly coming. For they teach that Jesus comes first in a heavenly role, followed by the ouster of the Slanderer from heaven and a time of great woe for the earth (the signs), and then he comes again to bring Armageddon to the earth. So, the time between these two comings are said to be the period of Jesus’ presence.

The scripture that is quoted to prove this theory is found at Revelation 12:7-12, where we read: ‘Next, war broke out in heaven. Michael and his messengers went to war against the dragon, and the dragon and his messengers fought back; but he lost and could no longer stay in heaven. So, the huge dragon was thrown out. He is the first snake, the one who is called the Slanderer and Opposer, who is leading the whole earth astray. He was thrown down to the earth along with his messengers. Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say, This is the moment when the salvation, the power, the Kingdom of our God, and the authorization of his Anointed One begins …  But woe to the earth and the sea, because the Slanderer has come down to you in a rage, knowing that he only has a short time left.’

Now, we know that the things mentioned in this scripture didn’t happen in some ancient time, because (as we were told at the beginning of the Revelation) it was a vision of what would happen ‘in the Lord’s Day.’ So, when will (or did) that prophecy start to be fulfilled? Well, those who teach the two comings of Jesus point to 1914-C.E. as the time when this great war in heaven began. For that was when the terrible First World War started, followed by famine throughout Europe, and the horrible world-wide plague of Spanish Influenza, which killed millions throughout the earth. This plague was so bad that the then U.S. President, Woodrow Wilson, was heard to comment that these events all looked like ‘the ride of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse.’

But, was this conclusion correct, and did the year 1914 see the great war in heaven and the beginning of Jesus’ parousia? Well, it could be, for no one can be sure of the meanings of the events that started in 1914, and they could in fact be the signs that Jesus told us to look for that would lead to his coming, but there are no scriptures or prophecies that tell of two comings of Jesus. So, although the signs could possibly be correct, we have a problem with the theory that Jesus came in 1914. For the scriptures shown above lead us to believe that Jesus’ Apostles were asking about the signs that he was about to arrive, not that he was already present. And notice that the prophecy of Revelation 12 does not refer to Jesus’ COMING.

Therefore, there’s no way that we could refer to 1914 as the year when Jesus had already come, for Jesus said that when he comes, ‘the sun will grow dark, the moon won’t put out light, the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the Heavens will shake… the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky and all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds in the sky with power and great glory.’

So, saying that Jesus has already ‘come’ is very misleading and technically wrong, and this leaves us with no reason to believe that the things which follow in the account in Matthew (such as the identifying of the faithful wise slave) has already happened. For more information, see the linked documents, ‘Armageddon – When?’ and ‘The Faithful and Sensible Slave.’

To return to the previous document, select the Back arrow on your browser

Home Page