MATTHEW 16:28 WHO IS STANDING HERE, WHICH SHALL NOT TASTE DEATH?

[Doug]

[Mat 16:28 KJV] 28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

[Mar 9:1 KJV] 1 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

[Luk 9:27 KJV] 27 But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God.

How could this be true seeing that the kingdom did not come and all those there with Jesus did indeed die. Was Jesus wrong in His saying?

In the verses above, it well may be that Jesus was not speaking of those standing before him at that moment, but rather, to those standing there in the future.

Jesus was speaking of those, who in the future, would come out of the tribulation and not taste of death and would see the literal kingdom come to earth. They would be those standing there to see the kingdom.

Jesus never said that any of those standing before him at that moment would be the ones to see the coming kingdom.

For me this best reconciles the verses and puts to rest the disparaging of the Bible.

 

[RedFan]

I am not competent to interpret what Jesus meant, and I won't speculate on it. What I will say is that His audience took him literally, and expected His return before the passing of the present generation. The first letter of the NT to be written, First Thessalonians, attests to this. Paul was dealing with a perceived problem in Thessalonika -- why were so may brethren dying physically (had they messed up in God's eyes somehow?), and would they be disadvantaged compared to the rest who would be alive at the Second Coming? It's tough to explain this in any other way than the literal interpretation of this oral tradition on Jesus's pre-Transfiguration words, later recorded in the synoptic passages you cited.

 

[Rockerduck]

Reason 1- The "some" standing there were Peter, James, and John, when they witnessed the transconfiguration in the next verse, six days after.
Reason 2 - After Pentecost, the Kingdom of God has arrived, with the power of the Holy Spirit. The body of Christ is the kingdom of God and we are told not to conform to this world.

 

[RedFan]

Reason 1- The "some" standing there were Peter, James, and John, when they witnessed the transconfiguration in the next verse, six days after.

Was it six days after (Mark 9:1-2), or eight days after (Luke 9:28)?

 

[Jay Ross]

Please, all of us will die a physical death unless we are still alive when Christ returns to Judge between the righteous and the unrighteous when He returns at the end of the seventh age. What Jesus was stating plainly was that there were be some standing around Him, when He made this statement, who would experience the second death when He returns to judge the peoples of the world/earth.

It is that simple to understand.

 

[Rockerduck]

Was it six days after (Mark 9:1-2), or eight days after (Luke 9:28)?

I based it on Matthew 16

 

[RedFan]

I based it on Matthew 16

So who is right, Matthew or Luke?

 

[Rockerduck]

So who is right, Matthew or Luke?

Matthew is a witness; he says after 6 days. Luke was not witness and says, about 8 days after.

You see, a witness knows, an investigator guesses. Luke interviewed many and got many answers so, he made the most accurate guess. You and I would have just said "a week later", but a witness is accurate.

 

[RedFan]

Matthew is a witness; he says after 6 days. Luke was not witness and says, about 8 days after.

You see, a witness knows, an investigator guesses. Luke interviewed many and got many answers so, he made the most accurate guess. You and I would have just said "a week later", but a witness is accurate.

Matthew was not a witness to the transfiguration. If Matt. 17:9 is to be believed, he didn't even hear about it until after Jesus's resurrection. I suppose he could have recalled Peter, James and John going up the mountain with Jesus six days after the utterance under discussion here, and put two-and-two together. But that long-after-the-fact recollection of six days would give him the most phenomenal memory of anyone who ever walked the planet!

Thus far we have been assuming the author of this gospel was one of the Twelve. Despite early Church tradition, it is not certain that the author of the gospel that now bears Matthew's name was written by Matthew (Levi) the tax collector apostle. Like Mark and Luke, the author never identifies himself, so it is an anonymous work -- and without any claim of eyewitnessing the events recounted. Scholars say it borrows heavily from the Gospel of Mark, which would be rather weird if the author, unlike Mark, was one of the Twelve. (Mark says six days too. Maybe that's where the author of Matthew's gospel got it.)

Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, the Didache and the epistle of Barnabas all lift quotes from the gospel, but never once do any of them claim Matthew the Apostle wrote it. Wouldn't you think they would have if they believed it to be true? That would add some gravitas, no?

It's also possible that Matthew the Apostle wrote a gospel, but this isn't it. Greek scholars say that there are some linguistic clues that this gospel was originally written in Greek, not translated from Aramaic or Hebrew. If so, that could make it a different work from what, according to Eusebius, Papias claimed Matthew wrote in Aramaic or Hebrew. Whatever his sources, if Papias is correct (maybe I should say correctly reported by Eusebius several centuries later), then the apostle Matthew did indeed write a gospel -- but this might not be it. (Papias elsewhere writes that Judas died by being crushed by a chariot, whereas Matthew says he hanged himself. So it's hard to believe that Papias had in front of him what we have in front of us for The Gospel According to Matthew.)

 

[Rockerduck]

Matthew was not a witness to the transfiguration. If Matt. 17:9 is to be believed, he didn't even hear about it until after Jesus's resurrection. I suppose he could have recalled Peter, James and John going up the mountain with Jesus six days after the utterance under discussion here, and put two-and-two together. But that long-after-the-fact recollection of six days would give him the most phenomenal memory of anyone who ever walked the planet!

Thus far we have been assuming the author of this gospel was one of the Twelve. Despite early Church tradition, it is not certain that the author of the gospel that now bears Matthew's name was written by Matthew (Levi) the tax collector apostle. Like Mark and Luke, the author never identifies himself, so it is an anonymous work -- and without any claim of eyewitnessing the events recounted. Scholars say it borrows heavily from the Gospel of Mark, which would be rather weird if the author, unlike Mark, was one of the Twelve. (Mark says six days too. Maybe that's where the author of Matthew's gospel got it.)

Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, the Didache and the epistle of Barnabas all lift quotes from the gospel, but never once do any of them claim Matthew the Apostle wrote it. Wouldn't you think they would have if they believed it to be true? That would add some gravitas, no?

It's also possible that Matthew the Apostle wrote a gospel, but this isn't it. Greek scholars say that there are some linguistic clues that this gospel was originally written in Greek, not translated from Aramaic or Hebrew. If so, that could make it a different work from what, according to Eusebius, Papias claimed Matthew wrote in Aramaic or Hebrew. Whatever his sources, if Papias is correct (maybe I should say correctly reported by Eusebius several centuries later), then the apostle Matthew did indeed write a gospel -- but this might not be it. (Papias elsewhere writes that Judas died by being crushed by a chariot, whereas Matthew says he hanged himself. So it's hard to believe that Papias had in front of him what we have in front of us for The Gospel According to Matthew.)

Jesus often left the other apostles and brought Peter, James, and John with them. The apostles stayed and Matthew recalled Jesus, Peter, James, and John leaving 6 days later to the mountain, then retold what Peter, James, and John reported. Remember we were only talking about the 6 or 8 days.

 

[RedFan]

Jesus often left the other apostles and brought Peter, James, and John with them. The apostles stayed and Matthew recalled Jesus, Peter, James, and John leaving 6 days later to the mountain, then retold what Peter, James, and John reported. Remember we were only talking about the 6 or 8 days.

I get it. But recalling the length of time between the "Some standing here" speech and the Peter-James-John-Jesus hike is an impressive accomplishment.

 

[Rockerduck]

I get it. But recalling the length of time between the "Some standing here" speech and the Peter-James-John-Jesus hike is an impressive accomplishment.

Yes it is. Matthew and John were apostles.
John 14:26 - But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

 

[keithr]

Perhaps Jesus was referring to the apostle John, who was the last of the apostles to die (and was the only one to die of natural causes), who was given visions of Jesus coming and establishing the Kingdom of God, etc. - the book of Revelation.

Revelation 1:1-2 (WEB):

(1) This is the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things which must happen soon, which he sent and made known by his angel to his servant, John,​

(2) who testified to God’s word, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, about everything that he saw.​

 

[Doug]

I based it on Matthew 16

Was it six days after (Mark 9:1-2), or eight days after (Luke 9:28)?

And after six days And it came to pass about an eight days after these sayings

After 6 days and about 8 days is 7 days

 

[Doug]

Reason 1- The "some" standing there were Peter, James, and John, when they witnessed the transconfiguration in the next verse, six days after.
Reason 2 - After Pentecost, the Kingdom of God has arrived, with the power of the Holy Spirit. The body of Christ is the kingdom of God and we are told not to conform to this world.

Please see my post on the transfiguration

 

[Rockerduck]

Please see my post on the transfiguration

why?

 

[Doug]

why?

It goes into whether or not the transfiguration resolves Matthew 16:28
I just posted it in Bible Study

 

[Rockerduck]

It goes into whether or not the transfiguration resolves Matthew 16:28
I just posted it in Bible Study

ok

 

[Doug]

ok

Let me know what you think

 

[Doug]

I am not competent to interpret what Jesus meant, and I won't speculate on it. What I will say is that His audience took him literally, and expected His return before the passing of the present generation. The first letter of the NT to be written, First Thessalonians, attests to this. Paul was dealing with a perceived problem in Thessalonika -- why were so may brethren dying physically (had they messed up in God's eyes somehow?), and would they be disadvantaged compared to the rest who would be alive at the Second Coming? It's tough to explain this in any other way than the literal interpretation of this oral tradition on Jesus's pre-Transfiguration words, later recorded in the synoptic passages you cited.

I don't think we are speculating on what Jesus is saying here but rather are understanding what he said.

The Jews certainly expected the promised kingdom and be delivered from their enemies. The kingdom was said "to be at hand" and was being offered to Israel.