The coming of the Son of Man: when? (Part 2) Sandy Grant

Hey Sandy, although I’m not Peter Bolt, I still have a comment. In fact, because I’m Gordon Cheng, I have a comment—a universal blogging truth if ever there was one.

I think you are on your strongest ground when you look to other parts of Matthew to provide the key to unlock the meaning of Matthew (which you do when you refer to Matt 25 and Matt 16).

So let me question you where I think you’re at your strongest, then, and ask why these references <i>also</i> are not explained in terms of an allusion to Dan 7:13,

“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.”

That is, with our ‘night vision’ goggles on, we see that the ‘coming’ is from the perspective of the heavenly throne, so that the Son of Man is coming from earth to heaven, and not the other way ‘round. And if the coming is from earth to heaven, it is actually a <i>going away</i> (from earth), which most naturally fits with the idea of Jesus’ ascension.

(I know you alluded to this in your previous post, but I think it is such a spiffing point that I am dredging it up all over again).

Dan 7:13 is clearly a scene of universal judgement, so the fact that Mt 25 and Mt 16 are also scenes of universal judgement is hardly surprising, is it? They need not be <i>final</i> judgement, so much as the beginning of it.

And the Boltian interpretation—that these references to Jesus’ ‘coming’ are still (at heart) about the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ—emerges unscathed.

I deliberately pass over your references to the epistles, in the hope that Peter will at some stage emerge from his Underworld wink to offer some further comment.

I think telescopic fulfilment is on the right track. Remember that when the OT prophets used their telescopes, they only saw a single coming of the Messiah!

And those nasty dispies… they might say that most of the NT telescopes collapsed the second coming into a single event.

Dear Sandy;
I’m not persuaded that the “telescope” view is all that helpful. I still incline very much to the view that Jesus’ words refer to his death, resurrection and ascension (with Gordon’s view on the “coming” being a coming to heavenly power at the right side of God.)
I take your point about interpreting the passage by other references to the event in the Gospel of Matthew. But let’s take this one you quoted:
Matthew 25:31-32: “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.”
I’d never thought of this before, but could this not be a very good description (in symbolism) of what is happening now that Jesus has risen? From his throne in heaven the whole world is spread out before him. They are being separated into two groups by the act of gospel preaching which is now happening. This view is supported by the fact that (as has often been pointed out) the differentiating criterion is how the world responds to Jesus’ “brothers” ie the disciples who are preaching the gospel.
In other words, rather than the sheep and goats passage illuminating the apocalyptic comments, those comments actually illuminate the sheep and goats passage.
Worth considering, anyway.
Regards
Neil Foster

Friends, thanks for bothering to comment. It is encouraging to know that someone is reading and thinking.

As I said in the initial post on this topic, I can see the attraction of the Bolt thesis. But I do not think that the complex of death, resurrection and ascension can account for all that is in Matthew 24 (and as it leads into chapter 25).

I would be really interested in what you think about my idea that since the thief and trumpet imagery is used in the epistles to refer to the final coming, then this should give us a strong hint as to how Jesus himself used this imagery.

As an additional comment here, I note that Paul seems to make explicit that his use of the trumpet imagery in 1 Thessalonians 4:16 as the harbinger of the Lord’s descent and the resurrection of the dead is based on “a word of the Lord” in v15…

For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. ESV

This presumably refers to oral tradition of Jesus’ earthly teaching that had been passed onto Paul.

Neil, thanks for commenting.

I have to say that I think you are drawing a long bow to suggest Matthew 25:31ff begins after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus and applies to the present age of gospel preaching.

Here are some reasons:

1. V31 refers to the Son of Man coming in glory and sitting on the throne in heavenly glory. Certainly Jesus’ death was a key moment of glory - especially in John’s Gospel - although this glory was veiled. But it appears most natural to me to see his glory in the parable of the sheep and goats as being completely manifest and public here. I.e. his glory here is obvious.

2. V32 suggests that all the nations are gathered before him rather than scattered throughout the world as they now are.

3. What is on view is not only separation into the two categories of sheep and goat, but also the immediate entry into two alternatives:
- the inheritance prepared since the creation of the world (v34), or
- departure into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels (v41).

4. I do not doubt that this parable is about how people have reacted to Christians and particularly to Christians preachers (the least of the King’s brothers) as they visit and as they suffer. However, it pictures people looking back to how they have treated such people as the explanation for their immediate fate.

All this seems very consistent to me with picturing the final and great day of judgment (though of course it teaches us how to prepare for that day).

So I am not persuaded yet by this re-reading of Matthew 25:31ff.

Incidentally, I have now dug out my copy of Broughton Knox’s Collected Works and the article on “The Five Comings of Jesus” mentioned by Gordon.

I note that Broughton saw the third coming of the Son of Man being his coming on the clouds of heaven in Matt 24:30 and 34 as being his coming to the Father in the ascension to sit at his right hand.

However Broughton refers to Matthew 25:31ff as his fifth coming - the final parousia - his coming with the angels for the final judgment (distinguished from what he calls the third coming on the clouds to receive the kingdom referred to above). Broughton says this final coming “with the angels” for judgment was already referred to in Matthew 16:27 (and he gives some probable OT background in Deut 33:2 (LXX) and Zech 14:5.

So Broughton did not see Matthew 25:31 (nor 16:27) as referring to the ascension and the age of gospel preaching.

Incidentally, Broughton’s second coming is associated with the destruction of Jerusalem which he sees predicted in Matthew 24:15 (and also v27).

In other words, it appears that in identifying multiple comings Broughton proposed a view not dissimilar to what I called the telescope view.

Dear Sandy;
I am happy to be corrected, and I see the force of the points you make about the passage following Matt 25:31 seeming to a final judgment where people immediately go to one fate or the other. But I am still unsure- after all, on what is probably too much of a tangent, what does it mean when we are told that Jesus’ disciples will “sit on thrones” and judge Israel? (Matt 19:28) I think this makes most sense when it refers to the act of “judging” as the act of gospel preaching. It seems to me possible that the metaphors of ruling and judging can be used for the divisive act of gospel preaching (as Peter, of course, is said to be given the power of the keys in a similar context (Matt 16:19). Still thinking it through.
Regards
Neil F

(see earlier comments on part one)

Sandy, I think your criticisms of Peter’s thesis are fair ones. Whilst it rightly seeks to preserve the centrality of the cross, I don’t think it adequately explains all the data. Like the complete Preterist view of Revelation, or the eschatology of Moltmann, if taken to its logical extremities, it could be open to the charge of leaving nothing in the text at all of the personal return of Jesus in judgement at the end of time, especially if the sheep and goats parable is simply about the gospel dividing people.

Commenting rules

If you would like your comment to be considered for publication, please observe the following rules:

  1. Please use your FULL NAME (your real name, not an alias).
  2. Stay on topic.
  3. Be godly.

Failure to adhere to these rules will result in your comment being quietly deleted.

If you want to give us feedback but don't want your comments to appear on the blog, DON'T use the form below. Instead, please send us an email or click on the button below.

Your Comment

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
The Art of Living

Sponsors

Placeholder

Recent comments

RSS logo

Stephen Jackson on The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel!

Sam Freney on The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel!

Marty Foord on The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel!

Dianne Howard on The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel!

Mike Bull on Daniel 2-7, Harry Potter and Narnia

Current discussions

RSS logo

Recent posts

RSS logo RSS logo

The Sola Panel is dead; long live the Sola Panel! by Tony Payne (4 comments). Regular Sola Panel readers will no doubt have detected a little slowness and quietness over the past six weeks or so. … more

Kids’ culture watch spot: Facing fear by Gordon Cheng (3 comments). By popular demand (two people asked), here is my next script for a culture watch spot I did with the kids … more

Daniel 2-7, Harry Potter and Narnia by Gordon Cheng (1 comment). It's a Sunday as I write this, and I'm speaking on Daniel 2 and 7 later this morning at a friend's … more

A constituent on same-sex marriage by Sandy Grant (34 comments). Last year, the Australian Parliament agreed that its Members of Parliament (MPs) should seek the … more

A tribute to John Stott by Sandy Grant (2 comments). Friends, I'm not ashamed to say I shed a tear when I opened up my computer on Thursday morning to read … more

Talkin’ ’bout my generation (part 3): On giants’ shoulders by Scott Newling (26 comments). This is the third post in this series; you can read part one, and more

Bible reading with kids by Sandy Grant (0 comments). I was asked for recommendations for resources that would encourage parents to read the Bible with their kids, especially … more

Talkin’ ’bout my generation (part 2): Stepping aside (not out) so others can step up (not in) by Scott Newling (3 comments). This is the second post in this series; you can read the first post, Unassuming … more

One more sip of the coffee by Tony Payne (8 comments). Sandy Grant is a man of integrity. Back in the early days of Sola Panel, I wrote a post … more

Talkin’ ’bout my generation (part 1): Unassuming generations by Scott Newling (30 comments). There is a model of ‘intergenerational theological decline’ that has been doing the rounds of late, and perhaps you … more

Tony Payne

Tony Payne

Paul is one of the Staff Editors at Matthias Media. He is married to Cathy and has three fantastic kids. He loves student ministry, reading, writing music and playing the saxophone, and is looking forward to meeting Jesus face to face.

Sola Panellists



Some other sites
we like  (Why these?)

Ministry partners