The End of the End of the World

Those who hold the futurist view of the End Times have to divide the disciples' question of Jesus into two unrelated parts: The first part asking about the timing of the destruction of the Temple, and the second, for no apparent reason, about signs of the end of the whole world.

Destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem
by Francesco Hayez

  On the Olivet Discourse and the Parousia of the Lord.

Until last week, my theological stronghold had only suffered two seismic shocks big enough to shift its foundations. The first was my conversion to the “Doctrines of Grace” and the second was my acceptance of the veracity of New Testament textual criticism. To these I now add my newfound Partial Preterist belief that the Parousia of Jesus Christ, his second coming, foretold in the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24:3–25:46; Mark 13:3–36; Luke 21:7–36) occurred in AD 70 with the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and its ending of the age of Mosaic Judaism.

I know how that will sound to most Christians unfamiliar with Preterism or who have been scared off of Preterism by some pastor or church authority. As it was before my other two doctrinal shifts, the world of pop Christianity is a battlefield of opposing certainties on this matter. In the case of Preterism, YouTube, my go-to marketplace of ideas, is replete with the scaremongering of Futurist Dispensationalists like Dean Odle.* But I have learned that in theological arguments the first side to start hysterically handing out heresy buttons is more often than not the mistaken side.

Two Questions about one question   If you've managed to remain calm enough to get this far, I believe two simple questions about the Olivet Discourse are all it will take to demonstrate to you that, at the very least, the common futurist view of the Parousia is highly suspect. Take a look at the three parallel passages below. These are how each Synoptist recorded the statement Jesus made immediately prior to the Olivet Discourse, as they appear in the ESV (my emphasis1):

Matthew 24:1–2 Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

Mark 13:1–2 And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” And Jesus said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

Luke 21:5–6 And while some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings, he said, “As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
Now look at what the disciples ask Jesus right after he says this (again, my emphasis):
Matthew 24:3 As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”2

Mark 13:3–4 And as he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew asked him privately, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are about to be accomplished?”

Luke 21:7 And they asked him, “Teacher, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when these things are about to take place?”

Questions

   1.  What one event can you name that is included in the "these things" of the disciples' question?

If you answered "the throwing down of the temple," that's good, you're paying attention!

   2.  What one event can you name that the disciples are asking heralding signs for?

If you answered "the throwing down of the temple," then great, you're still paying attention!

You also just agreed that the Parousia, the second coming of Jesus, (partly, at least) occurred in AD 70. Because the entire series of prophecies and signs that Jesus gives in the Olivet Discourse are heralding the Parousia.

Traditional interpreters are of course unanimous that the signs are only heralding a still-future Parousia and the destruction of the entire world.2 The echoing of these signs in the opening of the six seals in Revelation 6 is taken by them as confirmation of the futurity of these events, because they believe that the Book of Revelation is all about the distant future (even the letters to the churches).

Unfortunately, those who hold this futurist view have to divide the disciples' question into two unrelated parts, with the first part asking about the previous statement(s) of Jesus, and the second part asking, for no apparent reason, about signs of the end of the world.2 Yet, you only have to look at the text as I've presented it above to see that the disciples considered the destruction of the temple and Christ's Parousia to be simultaneous events and were asking for signs of its imminent occurring. The disciples, being fully cognizant of the significance of the destruction of the temple, must have been overwhelmed at the thought of this colossal centerpiece of Jewish social and cultic identity being rased to the ground. They must have been dying to know any details they could about this terrifying prediction and would've peppered Jesus with questions the minute they got him alone (to openly talk of destroying the temple was to court charges of sedition3). There is simply no warrant, textually or logically, for breaking their question into two unrelated parts.


Thinkers behind my thinking   While many different things I read and watched brought me to this conclusion regarding the disciples' question and the Olivet Discourse, three key works were particularly influential:

Bruce Gore's fantastic and energetic Bible study, "The Preterist Approach to Revelation,"

... Don Preston’s detailed but slow Preterist Apologia, “Why I Believe Jesus Returned in 70 AD,”
UPDATE 16/07/22:  That Preston video has been removed from YouTube, so I embedded this newer one in its place:

... and, especially, J. Stuart Russell's mind-blowing book The Parousia.


I found that pdf of Russell's book at the now defunct The Preterist Archive. There they used to cite a comment from, I believe, the forward written by R. C. Sproul in the latest edition of the book.
I can never read the New Testament again the same way I read it before reading The Parousia. I hope better scholars than I will continue to analyze and evaluate the content of J. Stuart Russell's important work.
Of course I can't say how much of the book he agrees with, but I can say that, according to his video series about this topic, Sproul's take on "The Last Days" certainly conforms to Russell's Partial Preterist views. Most of these videos have been removed from YouTube, but you can see the entire series at the Truth According to Scripture site. You can also buy Sproul's book on the subject, The Last Days according to Jesus at Amazon.




Right. Take care & God bless!








1.  The emphasized phrases are not as uniformly identical across the three Gospels in the Greek text. The meanings are the same, of course, but the word order and inflections are different.
2.  The last word in Matt 24:3 was less than optimally translated as "world" in the KJV. The Greek word is αἰών (aion) and it means "age," which is how all English translations since about 1880 have rendered it. The English word "eon" is a cognate of the Greek word; it is, for all intent and purposes, a transliteration, because it means the exact same thing as αἰών, "age." This mistranslation has caused untold confusion about the Olivet Discourse for centuries. Even today, KJV-onlyists refuse to believe the disciples asked about the end of the age, not the end of the world. Appealing to the other two Synoptic Gospels, where "world" is never mentioned, even in the KJV, is futile, because of their misapplication of the so-called "Law of First Mention." Since Matthew comes first in their Bible, his form of the question sets the standard for the others.
3.  The very charge against Jesus for which false witnesses were provided at his trial (Mark 14:55–59). "The seriousness of such a charge may be judged by remembering the experience of Jeremiah, who barely escaped with his life when accused of predicting the temple’s destruction, and of Uriah, who did not escape (Je. 26:7–24)." R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle: Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 2002), 605.








Comments

Popular posts from this blog