Why do futurists teach the second coming...

[Mellontes]

The vast majority of futurists teach the Lord's final parousia coming in the following two parables? Why is this?

Matthew 25:14-30 – the parable of the servants and the talents

Luke 19:12-27 – the parable of the servants and the pounds.

How can these futurists even remotely consider that the final parousia event is taught in these passages? I just don't get it!

[Mellontes]

Well it seems as if no futurist is going to explain why.

The reason is simply this. If they accept what the parables teach in regard to the final parousia coming (which is quite valid), then they must accept the fact that the return was always to the SAME INDIVIDUALS that he gave the pounds and the talents to originally. If that isn't a "This generation," "at hand," "nigh," and "near" type context, then there is none that exist. If you accept one, you are bound to accept the other. But of course, I realize that you won't because the futurist paradigm does not allow for that sort of thing...

[Douglas]

When do you believe Jesus received the Kingdom? AD 30 or AD 70 ?

[Mellontes]

When do you believe Jesus received the Kingdom? AD 30 or AD 70 ?

Are you referencing the kingdom which was "at hand" in Matthew 3:2, Matthew 4:17, Matthew 10:7, Matthew 12:28, Mark 1:15, Matthew 23:13, Luke 10:11, Luke 11:20, and Luke 16:16?

Or are you referencing the kingdom which was "at hand" in Luke 21:31 (the destruction of Jerusalem) and yet to come in Mark 9:1, Mark 14:25, Mark 15:43, Luke 13:28, LUKE 19:11, Luke 22:16, Luke 22:18, Luke 23:51 (post-cross)?

So, I guess my answer would have to be a resounding yes!
And yes, I realize my answer is of no use because of the nature of the kingdom of God (Romans 14:17). People were clearly coming into the kingdom just as clearly as the kingdom had not arrived in its fullness. The promise to the OT saints would have to be realized before the kingdom was fully come. And this came at the resurrection, which, by any theological standard, occurs at the parousia. I am in the kingdom of God right now.

My turn...Do you believe the part in those two parables about the return being to that same generation that he left?

And as an aside, how could Paul teach the kingdom of God from out of the prophets and out of the law of Moses in Acts 28:23 if the "kingdom of God" is seemingly not mentioned?

Acts 28:23 - And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

According to Acts 28:23 and the following verses, what did Paul equate the kingdom of God as being? Is it not being equated with conversion and the salvation of God?

[SamIam]

But as for you, O man of God, flee these things. Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, to keep the commandment unstained and free from reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which he will display at the proper time —he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen. (1 Timothy 6:11-16)

I know this is a simple-minded answer that the full preterists will find naive and unconvincing. Paul tells Timothy to "keep the faith" until the appearing of Jesus, who's appearing God will display when the time is right. The notion that the (at that time) future judgement carried out on the religious establishment in Jerusalem is the event being referenced here is puzzling. Why would Paul encourage Timothy to be faithful a few years until a city hundreds of miles away falls to the Romans. It seems more likely that Paul would encourage Timothy to remain faithful until a terminal event. He could have told Timothy to be faithful unitl his death. He chose, however, to tell Timothy to remain faithful until the appearance of Jesus. It seems that Timothy is instructed to live with that future terminal event in mind.

That is why I teach the yet future second coming.

[Mellontes]

But as for you, O man of God, flee these things. Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, to keep the commandment unstained and free from reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which he will display at the proper time —he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen. (1 Timothy 6:11-16)

I know this is a simple-minded answer that the full preterists will find naive and unconvincing. Paul tells Timothy to "keep the faith" until the appearing of Jesus, who's appearing God will display when the time is right. The notion that the (at that time) future judgement carried out on the religious establishment in Jerusalem is the event being referenced here is puzzling. Why would Paul encourage Timothy to be faithful a few years until a city hundreds of miles away falls to the Romans. It seems more likely that Paul would encourage Timothy to remain faithful until a terminal event. He could have told Timothy to be faithful unitl his death. He chose, however, to tell Timothy to remain faithful until the appearance of Jesus. It seems that Timothy is instructed to live with that future terminal event in mind.

That is why I teach the yet future second coming.

Yes, it SEEMS that way as you have demonstrated. And no, we don't consider what you say as being "a simple-minded answer that the full preterists will find naive and unconvincing." We were futurists once before and we understand the struggle regarding the things we say.

How can you read 2 Timothy 3 and not understand that the last days were the time frame in which Timothy lived? Remember, Paul is writing to Timothy.

2 Timothy 3:1-17 – [Timothy] This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: [Timothy] from such turn away.
6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these [who you will know, Timothy] also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.
10 But thou [Timothy] hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,
11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me [Paul] at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me [Paul].
12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.
13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
14 But [you, Timothy] continue thou [Timothy] in the things which thou [Timothy] hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou [Timothy] hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou [Timothy] hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee [Timothy] wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All [Old Testament] scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

I keep asking where in the Scriptures does it teach the end of the planet or the end of time and history, especially from the OT. If one has an incorrect view of what the "end" really was, then how can we understand any of its implications?

Perhaps you would like to take a stab at the question I asked Douglas:

"Do you believe the part in those two parables about the return being to that same generation that he left?"

[Allyn]

Hi Sam,

I honestly believe that the appearance of Jesus, said to come as Timothy remains faithful, is the explanation I gave to someone else. That apperance is three-fold - it is the coming of Christ at the destruction of Jerusalem for the purpose of 1. the resurrection of the dead. 2. the full establishment of the New Covenant (at the destruction of the temple) and 3. the bringing from heaven in the glory of the Father the Kingdom of God.

The kingdom of God is what Timothy was remaining faithful unto. The kingdom up to the time of 70AD was what every believer was preparing their lives for by their individual faithfulness. If a foot offends then remove the foot so that the rest of the body can enter into the kingdom when it comes. Entering the kingdom is for the biological living - not the biological dead. Timothy and the whol church was told to hold fast. Holding fast was for the sake of the assurance of entering into the kingdom.

But as for you, O man of God, flee these things. Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called and about which you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, to keep the commandment unstained and free from reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which he will display at the proper time —he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen. (1 Timothy 6:11-16)

I know this is a simple-minded answer that the full preterists will find naive and unconvincing. Paul tells Timothy to "keep the faith" until the appearing of Jesus, who's appearing God will display when the time is right. The notion that the (at that time) future judgement carried out on the religious establishment in Jerusalem is the event being referenced here is puzzling. Why would Paul encourage Timothy to be faithful a few years until a city hundreds of miles away falls to the Romans. It seems more likely that Paul would encourage Timothy to remain faithful until a terminal event. He could have told Timothy to be faithful unitl his death. He chose, however, to tell Timothy to remain faithful until the appearance of Jesus. It seems that Timothy is instructed to live with that future terminal event in mind.

That is why I teach the yet future second coming.

[steve]

But what was it about those events that made them the terminal point until which Timothy should persevere? Did Timothy die or rise from the dead in AD 70? Did he live beyond that point? What impact did that event have (or did Paul expect that event to have) on him, which would make that the time until which he must persevere, but (by implication) not afterward?

[Allyn]

But what was it about those events that made them the terminal point until which Timothy should persevere? Did Timothy die or rise from the dead in AD 70? Did he live beyond that point? What impact did that event have (or did Paul expect that event to have) on him, which would make that the time until which he must persevere, but (by implication) not afterward?

The Kingdom of God

(For a complete explanation go to http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 350#p43350

[steve]

Allyn,

Sorry but you will have to learn to give more coherent answers to challenges if you hope to convince those who are not already in the choir.


Mellontes,

You are still awaiting a reply to your original question, so I might offer one. The parables are set in the scenario of a single lifetime, it is true. However, nothing compels us to take every detail of a parable strictly literally. Jesus, when He left, left a church to which He had given opportunities and resources to invest for His kingdom. This remains true in every generation, and people of every generation will stand before Him and give an account for their stewardship. The nature of the stories embedded in the parables lent itself to describing a man who comes and goes in a single lifetime (because the character is assumed to be a mortal man, and therefore, for the purpose of the stories, he must accomplish everything in his one human lifetime)—which would, in the nature of the case, require that it also be in the lifetime of those same servants. The fulfillment need not occur in a single generation. Parables do not always conform in every detail to the thing to which they correspond (for example, it takes a short time for leaven to permeate a lump of dough, but the parable of the leaven describes a process that extended over a much longer period of time).