# Olivet Discourse - preterist questions and difficulties



## nwink (Nov 7, 2011)

It seems like most books explaining the Olivet Discourse from the preterist perspective focus almost entirely on Matthew 24 to the neglect of parallel passages (Marcellus Kik's "An Eschatology of Victory," etc). For example, when comparing the parallel passages to Matthew 24, a few verses seem to contradict some of Kik's conclusions. (His conclusions are basically that verses 1-35 refer to the destruction of Jerusalem, and then 36-end refer to the second coming)

In Luke 17, Jesus says the days of the Son of man will be like the days of Noah or the days of Lot where life is going along as normal and then they are suddenly destroyed. Right after that, Jesus says, "Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed. In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back." According to typical preterist exegesis in Matthew 24, this verse is instructing people to run as fast as they can to get out of Jerusalem when they see the Roman armies approaching the city (the abomination of desolation). However, Luke's account has this running-fast applying to the second coming as it follows on the heels of the reference to the days of Noah and days of Lot (compare with Matt 24).  But how could you run on that day? Or is Jesus alluding to the day of judgment on Jerusalem when he says in verse 30 "Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed"?

Also, in Luke 17:26, Jesus says, "And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the *days* of the Son of man." At least in Matthew 24, preterist interpreters make the argument that Jesus transitions in the second half of the dialogue to "day" rather than "days" to refer to "that day," the second coming...but in Luke, Jesus is referring to the "*days* of the Son of man" -- how could the references to the days of Noah and Lot be referring to the second coming when Jesus is using the plural "days" of the Son of man? 

Also, in Luke 21:27-28, Jesus says, "And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." What "redemption" is he referring to? ("redemption" is a strong word)


----------



## nwink (Nov 7, 2011)

Any thoughts?


----------



## nwink (Nov 7, 2011)

?


----------



## Peairtach (Nov 7, 2011)

I think Luke and the other parallel passages may summarise a few notable points that Jesus made in the Olivet Discourse, while Matthew 24 and 25 are a fuller account. 

I'll have a look at this again and get back.

There's a degree of the prophetic perspective in the Olivet Discourse, where prophets in the OT looked forward and saw a more proximate event, and then also saw a more distant event in the context of the proximate event.

Thus the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple signified that Jesus had come with the clouds of Heaven _to_ His Father and received all power in Heaven and on Earth, i.e. His Kingdom, the whole world and not just Israel, but it also foreshadowed the greater salvation and vindication of His people at the Eschaton, when He will come with the clouds of Heaven _from_ the Father and _for_ His people, and the greater judgment on the wicked.



> "I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed. (Dan 7:13-14)





> And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight. And while they were gazing into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, and said, "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven. (Acts 1:9-11)



Revelation 6 is Christ opening the scroll of history, which commences in the first century, but has relevance to all subsequent centuries.


----------



## nwink (Nov 8, 2011)

Peairtach said:


> Thus the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple signified that Jesus had come with the clouds of Heaven to His Father and received all power in Heaven and on Earth, i.e. His Kingdom, the whole world and not just Israel, but it also foreshadowed the greater salvation and vindication of His people at the Eschaton, when He will come with the clouds of Heaven from the Father and for His people, and the greater judgment on the wicked.



Richard, that perspective makes sense. As I was saying in my OP, I think verses like Luke 17:26, 31 throw a wrench into the preterist system that tries to make an easy clean cut saying "such and such" applies to AD 70, and then "everything after the transition statement" applies to the second coming. I think the preterist perspective works when isolating Matthew 24 from the parallel passages, but when taking into account the other passages, it just doesn't work. Could you recommend any good resources on Matthew 24 that would be from your perspective?


----------



## Peairtach (Nov 8, 2011)

Well Mark 13:1-31 ties in very well with Matthew 24:1-35, and Mark 13:32-37 ties in very well with Matthew 24:36 - 25:46.

In Luke 17 you've got more of a combination of the two great events - the indication of the coming of the Kingdom of God in the events of the Destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, and the Second Advent at the Eschaton.

Verses such as these in the various Gospels, indicate that Jesus is not physically returning to Earth in 70 A.D., and that the Parousia/Second Advent is delayed to the end of the world:



> Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them, "The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed, nor will they say, 'Look, here it is!' or 'There!' for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you." And he said to the disciples, "The days are coming when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. And they will say to you, 'Look, there!' or 'Look, here!' Do not go out or follow them. For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of Man be in his day. (Luke 17:20-24, ESV)



I.e.The Second Advent will be the loudest day in the history of the world and everyone will know about it. The disciples shouldn't believe that the Christ was going to make some quiet and secret return to Jerusalem or the wilderness to save Judea from the Romans. The Lord is making plain that although He is relating the destruction of Jerusalem to His Second Advent, and although it is a sign on Earth that the Son of Man is in Heaven and has all power in Heaven and on Earth, it is not the Second Advent.

The only book that _I can think of _ that speak about this "prophetic perspective" - which probably has a different term attached to it - is "The Interpretation of Prophecy" by Patrick Fairbairn (Banner of Truth), which is also online. A very good and very "sane" introduction to future prophecy in the Bible, if you can wade through it.

Many books and commentaries on prophetic passages will point this aspect of things out.

This is one of the most difficult, if not _the most difficult_, passages in the Gospels. So if you're interested in it, I'd read widely and deeply of Puritan and Reformed, and modern Reformed, commentary. Also read harmonies of the Gospels e.g. Calvin and others.

And don't be surprised if some parts are hard to understand or reconcile. The basic message is clear, however.

I believe that the interpretation that the earlier section of the prophecy is about the destruction of Jerusalem is broadly correct with pointers to, and adumbrations of, the Eschaton, while the latter section is to do with the Eschaton. 



> Also, in Luke 21:27-28, Jesus says, "And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." What "redemption" is he referring to? ("redemption" is a strong word)


This may refer to their vindication and redemption from persecution by the Jews in the events of A.D. 70, or it may be looking at our ultimate redemption through the perspective of that event. 

Once you look at some of the OT prophets, you will see that our Lord is not alone or unusual in speaking like this.


----------



## Peairtach (Dec 4, 2011)

Having consulted my patent "The NIV Harmony of the Gospels" by Thomas and Gundry, which I find quite useful, although there are no doubt better harmonies out there, I confirmed that Luke 17:22-37 isn't of course strictly parallel to the Olivet Discourse passages (which are Matthew 24 and 25; Mark 13; Luke 21:5-36).

The Luke 17 passage may have been pror instruction - prior to the Olivet Discourse that is - about His Second Advent and also the destruction of the Temple, given by Jesus to the disciples on their final journey to Jerusalem, in Samaria or Galilee.

If it includes teaching on both the Second Advent of Christ on the Eschaton, and the providential coming of Christ in judgment on Jerusalem and in salvation for the Judean Christians in A.D. 70, as seems to be the case, it exhibits that prophetic vision or perspective spoken of by biblical scholars like Patrick Fairbairn, whereby one nearer event is seen in the light of a more distant event, as an adumbration or token of the more distant event.

I think Fairbairn likened this prophetic perspective or vision to looking at the flickering flame of two candles, which are some significant distance from one another, but which seem to blend into one when looked at from a particular point of view, or looking at a range of mountains, in which the more distant but taller mountains seem to be as close as the nearer but smaller mountains below them.


----------

