a non-eschatological Coming?

[Randy Kluth]

wadr “return of Christ from heaven” cannot be Quoted, not one single time
hupo strepho

Dan 7.13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven."

Luke 21.26 "People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. 27 At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.”

Tell me these 2 passages are not related? Dan 7.13 forms the basis for most all of the NT references to Christ's 2nd Coming because Christ himself used that particular reference in speaking of his 2nd Coming. And so all of the NT eschatological references to the Son of Man originate with Dan 7.13. It is Christ's coming back from Heaven, "just as he left."

Acts 1.11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

 

[ScottA]

Dan 7.13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven."

Luke 21.26 "People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. 27 At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.”

Tell me these 2 passages are not related? Dan 7.13 forms the basis for most all of the NT references to Christ's 2nd Coming because Christ himself used that particular reference in speaking of his 2nd Coming. And so all of the NT eschatological references to the Son of Man originate with Dan 7.13. It is Christ's coming back from Heaven, "just as he left."

Acts 1.11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

But you have not reconciled those passages with John 14:19. --"The world sees Me no more."

Which is because you have not "rightly divided" what is written of this world from that which is written of the kingdom...what is of the world, and what is not.

 

[Truth7t7]

As for me, I do not "believe" that Jesus will be seen in the world again...but [know] that He will not--because He said so.

I also told how those verses are to be reconciled with John 14:19--which you have not been able to do, clearly refusing to receive the whole truth from Christ himself. You are a witness against yourself and your own error.

There we have it, you deny literal human eyes in this world will witness Jesus Christ in his future return, loud and clear for all to see

A teaching and belief that many within the church would claim as heretical, a basic foundation of the christian faith, in the "Literal" second coming of Jesus Christ in the heavens, that will be witnessed by living humans upon this earth

Revelation 1:7KJV
7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Matthew 24:30KJV
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

well wadr it is not at all “miles wide and high,” except in English, which has obscured the true measurements, imo

and i dont know of course, but i suggest that both “12” and “thousand” (and probably stadia too) have allegorical meanings that are meant to be understood in this context

Revelation 21:16 Lexicon: The city is laid out as a square, and its length is as great as the width; and he measured the city with the rod, fifteen hundred miles; its length and width and height are equal.
also likely not a “square,” tetragonos, but meh
that would force a “cube,” right
which has eight corners?
so, the translation becomes a wonderful illustration of…two dimensional thinking, imo :)

read it from the lex, and ignore the english, say i

Suggest all you want but why does God need a translator for us to understand His Word. Allegorists do not believe the Bible is the word o9f God, but is a code that needs to be translated in too many places.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

That is a spiritual desolation of the city not a physical destruction. The antichrist will rule from Jerusalem so he won't destroy it. Second, there will be no temple at that timeframe so no temple can be destroyed.







That's before Christ sat on the mount so this is not part of the Olivet Discourse. It's roughly an hours walk from the temple to the bottom of the mount. They walked up the mount to an unknown height and then Christ sat down and began to tell them of future events surrounding the Great Tribulation. Jerusalem and it's temple is not part of those events.

Well that is not what Gods Word says and what history has shown. 70 AD was when the Luke portion about Jerusalem was fulfilled!

And sorry but the temple will be rebuilt and the antichrist will go into the holy place becoming the abomination that makes desolate and declare genocide against Jews!

People rejected as spiritual , I srael returning to her land to be juedged- then 1948 happened.
People rejected as spiritual that Israel would ever have Jerusalem again as prophesied- then 1967 happened.

I will take God at His Word whether than you atr yours. And how can we be certain you are not taking spiritually and not literally??

 

[ScottA]

There we have it, you deny literal human eyes in this world will witness Jesus Christ in his future return, loud and clear for all to see

A teaching and belief that many within the church would claim as heretical, a basic foundation of the christian faith, in the "Literal" second coming of Jesus Christ in the heavens, that will be witnessed by living humans upon this earth

Revelation 1:7KJV
7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Matthew 24:30KJV
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Amazing...you describe a "church" that does not believe all of what Jesus said (John 14:19), and you call me a heretic!

What you describe is NOT the church of Jesus Christ.

Examine thyself. You are on that wide path He spoke of.

​

 

[bbyrd009]

but Christ is “Spirit,” right

Wrong.

Luk 24:36 And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
Luk 24:37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.
Luk 24:38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?
Luk 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

ah well that is Jesus, yes? Wasn’t the Second Adam made a life giving spirit?

and i understand how sweet the fruit is lol, but you may not be doing yourself any favors with that approach

 

[Randy Kluth]

But you have not reconciled those passages with John 14:19. --"The world sees Me no more."

Which is because you have not "rightly divided" what is written of this world from that which is written of the kingdom...what is of the world, and what is not.

I do not see any conflict between these various passages--why should I try to reconcile that which does not require reconciliation? I do not see any conflict. What conflict do you see?

I really dislike when the "conflict" that someone else sees is not being verbalized though it is put forward as "obvious" to them! It leaves me to *guess* what their conflict is?

Are you suggesting that Jesus' "not being seen anymore" conflicts with the notion that Jesus "comes" in 70 AD? If so, this is a misrepresentation of the position that I put forward.

I did *not* suggest that Jesus' *2nd Coming* takes place in 70 AD, nor that he physically and literally appears in the destruction of the temple event. Rather, I'm suggesting that he "comes" in the same way that God "comes" to judge Israel in OT events of judgment, such as the Babylonian judgment.

This is an entirely different type of "coming," which does not involve Jesus' physical appearance. Rather, he comes in the form of the historical judgment, which suggests that he is orchestrating the event as God.

This non-eschatological "coming" of Jesus portrays him as in opposition to a strictly eschatological coming of his physical person. Even the presence of his physical person, bringing messianic healing as such, is portrayed as non-eschatological in Luke 17!

Luke 17.22 Then he said to his disciples, “The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it.

Here we see that "days of the Son of Man" can be both non-eschatological and representative of Jesus' human presence. But then we see later that a "day of the Son of Man" can also be non-eschatological and void of his human presence:

Luke 17.30 “It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31 On that day no one who is on the housetop, with possessions inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything."

And so, the "Day of the Lord" can represent either Jesus' human presence or only his divine presence in the judgment. It can be either eschatological or non-eschatological.

That was, I think, what Jesus meant to say, that Jews should not just be looking for some eschatological phenomena that brings instant deliverance, but rather, recognize the signs of the times, that the Jewish nation was disobedient and in danger of imminent judgment. In this case, the Days of the Son of Man, as Jesus' physical presence to do miracles, would be missed. But the Day of the Son of Man as divine judgment would instead be revealed.

 

[bbyrd009]

Unless there is nothing good in you. Remember the three Hebrews and the soldiers of Nebuchadnezzar...[Daniel 3] Where was the good?

ha…in the fourth figure in the fire?

 

[bbyrd009]

The Return of Christ from Heaven is in the Olivet Discourse, clearly

so if it’s in there clearly, then by all means go with that, Randy

id only say to be aware that you are reading in English, and that there might be more to the story

Dan 7.13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven."

Luke 21.26 "People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken. 27 At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 28 When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.”

Tell me these 2 passages are not related? Dan 7.13 forms the basis for most all of the NT references to Christ's 2nd Coming because Christ himself used that particular reference in speaking of his 2nd Coming. And so all of the NT eschatological references to the Son of Man originate with Dan 7.13. It is Christ's coming back from Heaven, "just as he left."

Acts 1.11 “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”

im not disagreeing that they are related, but i would argue that we have yet to see Him as He is,

and fwiw you have not found a hupo strepho yet, nor a shuvu,
Daniel 7:13 Lexicon: "I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him.
(which is a “vision” anyway, not meaning to discount it)
Acts 1:11 Lexicon: They also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven."
if erchomai = “come, go,” its kinda interesting that it is only used for “come” in that passage, while poreuomai is used for “go” huh?
Strong's Greek: 2064. ἔρχομαι (erchomai) -- to come, go
Strong's Greek: 4198. πορεύομαι (poreuomai) -- to go

 

[bbyrd009]

Suggest all you want

(we’re tired of this manna, give us some meat to eat)

but why does God need a translator for us to understand His Word.

well, bc we can’t read ancient Greek?

Allegorists do not believe the Bible is the word o9f God,

”In the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God”
but hopefully you see on some level that it is the translating that i am suggesting one examine! However, you might spend a bit of time looking for any of the following, “read the Word, teach the Word, study the Word,” etc, anything other than (hear) the Word iow, or i mean bam keep “reading” the Word if you like, but i suggest that this (very common) pov keeps Pneuma obscured

but is a code that needs to be translated in too many places.

well, How is it you did not know I was not talking about bread? and even the “parable” thing, but i also agree that sometimes the best approach to truth is in a literal reading, too

 

[Truth7t7]

Amazing...you describe a "church" that does not believe all of what Jesus said (John 14:19), and you call me a heretic!

What you describe is NOT the church of Jesus Christ.

Examine thyself. You are on that wide path He spoke of.

​

Yes, the future literal second coming of Jesus Christ seen below, is a foundational pillar in Christian Orthodoxy

"Many" within the Christian faith would consider denial of this as heretical

Revelation 1:7KJV
7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Matthew 24:30KJV
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 

[Truth7t7]

Amazing...you describe a "church" that does not believe all of what Jesus said (John 14:19), and you call me a heretic!

What you describe is NOT the church of Jesus Christ.

Examine thyself. You are on that wide path He spoke of.

​

Do you believe in the Father, Son, Holy Spirit, being the Triune Godhead?

Do you believe Jesus Christ was fully God manifest in the flesh upon this earth?

 

[Truth7t7]

I referred to the verse because it clearly states that Christ does not make a visible return to this world. (That was the question, and 7t's erroneous assertion)

But the verse definitely does speak of the second coming of Christ, as He very much said what Paul also said and confirmed, that to those who are saved, He return to a second time.

Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus Christ will visibly be seen by human eyes upon this earth at his future return

You deny the glorious second coming of Jesus Christ in the heavens seen below, it's that simple

The future glorious second coming of Jesus Christ in the heavens, is a foundational pillar withing the Christian faith and orthodoxy

"Many" within the Christian faith would consider denial of this as heretical

Revelation 1:7KJV
7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

Matthew 24:30KJV
30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

 

[Randy Kluth]

so if it’s in there clearly, then by all means go with that, Randy

id only say to be aware that you are reading in English, and that there might be more to the story
im not disagreeing that they are related, but i would argue that we have yet to see Him as He is,

and fwiw you have not found a hupo strepho yet, nor a shuvu,
Daniel 7:13 Lexicon: "I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him.
(which is a “vision” anyway, not meaning to discount it)
Acts 1:11 Lexicon: They also said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven."
if erchomai = “come, go,” its kinda interesting that it is only used for “come” in that passage, while poreuomai is used for “go” huh?
Strong's Greek: 2064. ἔρχομαι (erchomai) -- to come, go
Strong's Greek: 4198. πορεύομαι (poreuomai) -- to go

When it comes to arguing over specific Greek words, I leave that to my brother, who is more specialized in that. There are some very important interpretive fallacies to avoid in this, which I hope you're aware of?

In this case, I don't think we need to wade out into the deep waters of dissecting differences between Greek words to know that the same concept of Christ's Return from heaven is in Dan 7, the Olivet Discourse, 1 Thes 4, 2 Thes 1-2, and the book of Revelation. :)

But thanks for your interest.

 

[bbyrd009]

When it comes to arguing over specific Greek words, I leave that to my brother, who is more specialized in that. There are some very important interpretive fallacies to avoid in this, which I hope you're aware of?

lexicons pretty much lay it all out imo, and it is the closest i will ever come to reading in the original language i guess. As to interpretive fallacies, Hebrew idiom gives me the most trouble, but i prolly have stumbled over most of them at this point

In this case, I don't think we need to wade out into the deep waters of dissecting differences between Greek words to know that the same concept of Christ's Return from heaven is in Dan 7, the Olivet Discourse, 1 Thes 4, 2 Thes 1-2, and the book of Revelation. :)

well, imo the fact that “Jesus, returning” cannot be Quoted in the original one, single, time, anywhere, does not require that we wade out into any deep waters at all, and tbh im pretty sure i could even make the case in English at this point…but who might hear it?
have a nice day

 

[Randy Kluth]

lexicons pretty much lay it all out imo, and it is the closest i will ever come to reading in the original language i guess. As to interpretive fallacies, Hebrew idiom gives me the most trouble, but i prolly have stumbled over most of them at this point
well, imo the fact that “Jesus, returning” cannot be Quoted in the original one, single, time, anywhere, does not require that we wade out into any deep waters at all, and tbh im pretty sure i could even make the case in English at this point…but who might hear it?
have a nice day

I guess I just haven't been following your line of argument very well. To me, Daniel 7 explicitly depicts the Son of Man coming to earth from heaven. And the NT references indicate the same, including the Olivet Discourse. In fact, it appears that Jesus had Daniel in mind in his Olivet Discourse!

Is your point that Jesus' *return* is not being mentioned? Or, are you claiming that Jesus' *coming down from heaven* is not being mentioned? Obviously, the OT prophecies are not going to specify how many times Messiah will be on earth in order to set up his Kingdom.

His coming as a man to die was set forth as a kind of "mystery" to be received by those "with eyes to see." Only honest people would recognize how human sin would react to the earthly appearance of Jesus, making it necessary for him to *return* from heaven.

On the problems of understanding the original biblical languages, you and I are in the same place. We both need reference works. But my brother, although he doesn't claim to be an expert, has more knowledge than the average. If you have any questions based on the language, he is always there to help me, and I can ask him? Thanks for your interest!

 

[Marty fox]

I guess I just haven't been following your line of argument very well. To me, Daniel 7 explicitly depicts the Son of Man coming to earth from heaven. And the NT references indicate the same, including the Olivet Discourse. In fact, it appears that Jesus had Daniel in mind in his Olivet Discourse!

Is your point that Jesus' *return* is not being mentioned? Or, are you claiming that Jesus' *coming down from heaven* is not being mentioned? Obviously, the OT prophecies are not going to specify how many times Messiah will be on earth in order to set up his Kingdom.

His coming as a man to die was set forth as a kind of "mystery" to be received by those "with eyes to see." Only honest people would recognize how human sin would react to the earthly appearance of Jesus, making it necessary for him to *return* from heaven.

On the problems of understanding the original biblical languages, you and I are in the same place. We both need reference works. But my brother, although he doesn't claim to be an expert, has more knowledge than the average. If you have any questions based on the language, he is always there to help me, and I can ask him? Thanks for your interest!

Actually Daniel 7 says that Jesus is going to heaven on the clouds not coming to the earth.

Daniel 7:13-14
13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

This is why the pharasies shouted blasphemy in Matthew 26 they knew that Jesus was claiming to be God the son of man from Daniel 7

Hey Randy did you see my PM to you on the other site a couple of days ago on the political thread?

 

[Enoch111]

Actually Daniel 7 says that Jesus is going to heaven on the clouds not coming to the earth.

How could Christ establish His Kingdom on earth without coming to earth? You have misunderstood and misrepresented Daniel 7 (which ties into the rest of the book of Daniel. There is no such nonsense as a "non-eschatological" coming.

 

[bbyrd009]

ok, but id be careful about that wise in his own eyes deal eh

I guess I just haven't been following your line of argument very well. To me, Daniel 7 explicitly depicts the Son of Man coming to earth from heaven. And the NT references indicate the same, including the Olivet Discourse. In fact, it appears that Jesus had Daniel in mind in his Olivet Discourse!

Is your point that Jesus' *return* is not being mentioned? Or, are you claiming that Jesus' *coming down from heaven* is not being mentioned? Obviously, the OT prophecies are not going to specify how many times Messiah will be on earth in order to set up his Kingdom.

His coming as a man to die was set forth as a kind of "mystery" to be received by those "with eyes to see." Only honest people would recognize how human sin would react to the earthly appearance of Jesus, making it necessary for him to *return* from heaven.

On the problems of understanding the original biblical languages, you and I are in the same place. We both need reference works. But my brother, although he doesn't claim to be an expert, has more knowledge than the average. If you have any questions based on the language, he is always there to help me, and I can ask him? Thanks for your interest!

well, if you dont trust your own eyes (pun intended) then bam (“by all means;” im tryna make it a thing :)) ask your bro, and see what he says, sure! Working up, the mystery you mention is the subject i am attempting to broach today…and i hope you get that i would love a literal return as much as the next believer, only i am convinced now that that is the obscuring, as we even get a hint of in English; Christ “comes, appears, is revealed,” and every eye will see Him (as opposed to “all eyes”), we must come to see Him as He is, and i could go on, Why have You forsaken Me? is even a big clue imo (I will never leave you nor forsake you) BIBLE VERSES ABOUT I WILL NEVER LEAVE YOU NOR FORSAKE YOU but Death, More Abundantly is, after all, what most believers seek i guess
daughters of Jerusalem, do not find love until you are ready