ABSTRACT: The Dunning-Kruger effect is the phenomenon by which those least competent in a certain subject area overestimate their skills the most. It also causes those most competent in a subject area to think less of their own talents. In following Full Preterist (FP) conversations the main question that is repeated over and over again is a striking example of the cognitive dissonance employed in their thinking. The FP will often ask; Did the disciples understand from the Olivet that Jesus was to return in that generation, or do they think he lied? A small variance to the question is where does scripture talk about a third “second coming.” The underlying presupposition is that the FP has a better understanding of the Olivet discourse and Jesus own words than the misguided Futurist over the last two thousand years which would be a direct example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This essay explores what it was that Jesus actually promised in the Olivet juxtaposed to the rampant diversity of answers presented by the growing confusion among the FP followers.
Parousia
The Greek word παρουσία, – parousia, is used two times in the Greek Septuagint apocrypha (Maccabees) in regard to an army coming on the behalf of God to bring judgment against a foreign nation. In the Roman culture a Parousia was the arrival of a king, his personal presence after being absent, to a city in which the inhabitant would receive a runner in advance of his arrival to announce the coming of the king. The inhabitants would then come out of the city and ἀπάντησις -apantésis: -a meeting up, and then both parties would enter the city together. This event is depicted in the triumphant entry of Christ into Jerusalem for his last week.
The New Testament uses the word Parousia twenty-four times. Sixteen times it concerns the coming of Christ himself. Paul then uses the word to indicate the coming of the lawless one (2 Thess 2:8) or the coming of a person who is absent but now present such as Titus ((2 Cor 7:6) or Stephanas (1 Cor 16:17.) The question needs to be answered: Does Paul, like in the Septuagint, use the meaning of the word Parousia in regard to Christ’s coming as the coming of an army to execute judgment on a nation or for the arrival of a person “presence” after being absent?
The word is used three times by Mathew in his gospel alone. It is well documented that Matt was a companion of Paul in which Matt explained many things to Paul concerning Jesus. Paul’s 1st letter to the Corinthains was written approximately AD 53-54. Mathew’s gospel was written after his death between 67-71 AD. In 1 Corinthains 11:24-26 we have an almost exact word for word comment concerning the Lord’s supper as found in Mathew’s gospel. Many FP us this similarity as evidence to argue that Mathew was written much earlier but the consensus of scholarship holds to the later date of Mathews gospel. In the same way FP use similar references found in Peter, and Jude, that are also found in the book of Revelation to claim the writers were quoting from Revelation but by implication that would mean that John wrote Revelation as early as AD 55. This fact has not deterred FP from making these claims over and over again even in the light of the historical record.
NT Wright stated,
The second meaning emerges when a person of high rank makes a visit to a subject state, particularly when a king or emperor visits a colony or province. The word for such a visit is royal presence: in Greek, parousia.
Concerning the coming of Christ as described in I Thess 4, Jesus is returning to earth in which the physically dead in Christ are raised to life and the saints who are alive are changed and made immortal and imperishable (I Cor 15 parallel.) In Zech 14:5 it says that at Christ coming he brings with him the resurrected saints, the bride of Christ (Rev 19:16, 17). Paul quotes from this passage in Zechariah 14 in I Thess 3:13, “at the coming of our Lord Jesus with all his saints.” In Revelation 19, “And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses.” The armies being the resurrected saints, thus suggesting the Parousia of Christ is the coming of an army to carry out judgment against the beast and the kings of the earth.
The word parousia had two lively meanings in non-Christian discourse at the time. Both of these seem to have influenced it in its Christian meaning. The first meaning was the mysterious presence of a god or divinity, particularly when the power of this god was revealed in healing. People would suddenly be aware of a supernatural and powerful presence, and the obvious word for this was parousia. Josephus sometimes uses this word when he is talking about yhwh coming to the rescue of Israel.9 God’s powerful, saving presence is revealed in action, for instance when Israel under King Hezekiah was miraculously defended against the Assyrians.
From the Matthean viewpoint of Parousia and the destruction of the temple, denotes that a coming of an army is being used to carry out judgment against Israel. It is a clear contradiction to suggest the armies of heaven that come with him defeat the armies of the kings of the earth and yet suggest Rev 19 is a description of the destruction of Jerusalem and yet FP will look a person straight in the eye and declare Jesus got the spiritual victory over those armies. The OT example is of God going out on a day of battle was to completely annihilate the gentile nation. The reality of Rev 19 for the FP is that Christ and his army destroy the “Roman” army that was sent by God to judge Israel, and yet Rome survived for the next 300 years, while the Babylonians were wiped out in a day of God’s judgment.
In Math 26:64 Jesus stated very clearly that, “you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
The reference of the “son of man” comes from Daniel 7:13-14 where the son of man is viewed as coming to the ancient of days in heaven. A picture of his ascension in which He is given the keys to the kingdom and given all authority in heaven to rule on the throne of his father David from heaven. Daniel stated;
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.
14And to him was given dominion
and glory and a kingdom,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
should serve him;
“Seated at the right hand” as used in the OT and NT denotes one, a position of honor. Where Christ has been exalted above all things. With that exaltation comes the authority to judge. John stated in chapter five of his gospel, “For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father.”
The expression then of “coming on clouds” comes from the OT testament where God came down as a cloud upon the Mount Sinai or upon the temple as a sign of his personal presence.
In Jeremiah 4:16 the prophet stated, “Warn the nations that he is coming; announce to Jerusalem,” and this would be in judgment against them. This did not imply that Jesus himself or God himself would come down and destroy Jerusalem as the historical evidence was that this coming was carried out by the Babylonians. Thus the same language being used by Jesus indicates this coming of his was not about His second coming but of an army coming in judgment.
NT Wright stated,
First, when Jesus speaks of “the son of man coming on the clouds,” he is talking not about the second coming but, in line with the Daniel 7 text he is quoting, about his vindication after suffering. The “coming” is an upward, not a downward, movement. In context, the key texts mean that though Jesus is going to his death, he will be vindicated by events that will take place afterward. What those events are remains cryptic from the point of view of the passages in question, which is one good reason for thinking them authentic, but they certainly include both Jesus’s resurrection and the destruction of the Temple, the system that opposed him and his mission.[1]
The conclusion then reached is that nowhere in the gospels do they teach a second coming.
N T Wright again stated clearly,
Nor will it do to say, as do some who grasp part of the point but have not worked it through, that the events of a.d. 70 were themselves the second coming of Jesus so that ever since then we have been living in God’s new age and there is no further coming to await. This may seem to many readers, as indeed it seems to me, a bizarre position to hold, but there are some who not only hold it but also eagerly propagate it and use some of my arguments to support it. This results from a confusion: if the texts that speak of “the son of man coming on the clouds” refer to a.d. 70, as I have argued that (in part) they do, this doesn’t mean that a.d. 70 was the “second coming” because the “son of man” texts aren’t “second coming” texts at all, despite their frequent misreading that way. They are about Jesus’s vindication. And Jesus’s vindication—in his resurrection, ascension, and judgment on Jerusalem—requires a still further event for everything to be complete. Let me say it emphatically for the sake of those who are confused on the point (and to the amusement, no doubt, of those who are not): the second coming has not yet occurred.
So if the gospel accounts of Jesus’s teaching do not refer to the second coming, where does the idea come from? Quite simply, from the rest of the New Testament.[2]
When Jesus ascended the very first thing the Angel told them was, “This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.” In Peter’s first sermon the promise of Christ return was established as core belief of “Christianity” where Peter stated, “that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, whom heaven must receive until the time for restoring all the things about which God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets long age.” Indicated that Peter understood Jesus would come from out of heaven once more in order to bring full restoration of all things to this earth.
Paul letters then are full of the future coming or appearing of Jesus. In 2 Thess 2:8 Paul combines Parousia, with ἐπιφάνεια -Epiphaneia, appearing, manifestation, being made visible. The writer of Hebrews states, that Christ appeared the first time to take away sin and so he will appear a second time to bring salvation. In the Resurrection the saints are raised and those who are alive are changed, the are raised power and glory, made imperishable and immortal. We are “saved” body, soul, and spirit at His coming.
John stated in I John 2:28, 3:2
Now, children, abide in him; so that, when he appears [ean phanerothe-],
we may have confidence and not be shrink from him in shame
at his presence [parousia]. . . . Beloved, we are now God’s children;
and it has not yet appeared [oupo– ephanero–the-] what we shall be; but
we know that when he appears [ean phanero–the-], we shall be like
him, because we shall see him just as he is.
So this appearing of Christ according to audience relevance is something that John, living in Asia demands that Christ will appear to him at his coming.
N T Wright stated,
Here we have more or less exactly the same picture as in Colossians, though this time with appearing and parousia happily side by side. Of course, when he “appears” he will be “present.” But the point of stressing “appearing” here is that, though in one sense it will seem to us that he is “coming,” he will in fact be “appearing” right where he presently is—not a long way away within our own space-time world but in his own world, God’s world, the world we call heaven. This world is different from ours (earth) but intersects with it in countless ways, not least in the inner lives of Christians themselves. One day the two worlds will be integrated completely and be fully visible to one another, producing that transformation of which both Paul and John speak.[3]
Some FP have stated,
I said no one saw Jesus descend with His angels on a cloud. That did not happen in a literal sense. And according to NT Wright .. the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds of heaven was never going to present that way .. was never intended .. and would have been a foreign concept to a Jewish mind! … Jesus did not descend to earth visibly on a cloud or appear to any man anywhere in the realm of time and space … no one saw Jesus descend with His angels on a cloud. That did not happen in a literal sense.
So the FP engages in mind blowing cognitive dissonance. They read the verses that state “he will appear at his coming.” Which is based on the knowledge that there never was a historical or eyewitness declaration that Jesus came and appeared to anyone in AD 70 but yet he had to have come since it was promised in the Olivet he was coming in glory and power in that generation. Then try to use N T Wright as a justification for the position when in his writing he acknowledges that He is to appear before all men at his coming.
The FP believes the expressions “shall not taste death” in Matt 16 and “we who are still alive” in 1 Thess 4 are equivalent phrases that imply fulfilment in that generation. And in Matt 24 Jesus was explicit about the time. “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away, until all these things have happened.” Since the TIME is the same in these 3 passages it follows that the coming, the trumpet, the shout and the angels are the same. Yet this gathering of angels in the Olivet had nothing to do with a coming and resurrection. The FP argues that according to Paul in 1 Thess 4, “The Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. ..”
The FP displays a collection of symptoms that affect the mind, where there has been some loss of contact with reality. During an episode of psychosis, a person’s thoughts and perceptions are disrupted and they may have difficulty recognizing what is real and what is not. If the Olivet and its use of Parousia deny the implication of Christ coming down and then the implicit statements of Paul demand a bodily coming and physical visible appearance with his literal “presence” we have to assume some type of mental breakdown.
The promised type of coming foretold in the Olivet is NOT Jesus coming down, its a promise of coming of a judgment from him for their rejection of him upon Jerusalem only
The coming of I Thess 4 is a promise of Jesus coming back to judge the whole world, to appear, and restore Israel as a nation… all the churches are judged…. the world of the ungodly is judged, the beast and his kingdom is judged and the righteous are resurrected and those who are alive are changed and made immortal at his coming along with those who are alive when he comes. The expressions “shall not taste death” in Matt 16 and “we who are still alive” in 1 Thess 4 are NOT equivalent phrases. “We who are still alive” ” means those who are alive and living when he comes will not physically die when he returns because they will be made immortal. Is there even one person who is still alive from AD 70? Even John died after AD 70 and he was not made “Immortal” so if the second coming took place in AD 70 every Christian would have been changed and made immortal that means they can never die. and YET those people all died so what does that mean?
AD 70 was not the second coming and there was no resurrection
“Shall not taste death” means that they will not die before they see the judgment come. BUT eventually they will still die because they were not made immortal, hence the difference and again another failure of the FP to discern a logical difference.
Now the FP claims that we employ a false bias at the back of this assumption. One person stated,
You choose nature over time because you reject the multiple time statements of the NT in preference for what you THINK a resurrection to life eternal will look like on the earthly plane. And the hubris in this is astounding!! Your projection of a visible resurrection in the exact likeness of the resurrection in Matt 27 has voided the time statements of their temporal relevance!!
The FP simply cannot grasp that the issue is not about timing. The time statements indicate this judgment was to come in that generation. The question is; what is coming?
At his coming it is generally acknowledged that all of Christendom, the believer who is alive, will be transformed in the twinkling of an eye and made immortal and imperishable. The “dead in Christ will rise first.” The physically dead will rise from out of their tombs. To claim this this is an invisible event is simply indefensible. One person goes on to say,
To be clear I don’t believe their bodies were instantly transformed from natural bodies to spiritual bodies immediately after the dead were raised.
This is based on the idea that a spiritual body is one that is invisible, not one a person can see in this realm. But again another example of a clear mental break from what Paul says.
And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.
Paul is saying that those who are alive, (1) will not die. (2) they are changed (3) are caught up with those who raised from the dead. BUT this person goes on to say,
I believe those who died in the Lord from then on appeared in glory with Jesus clothed in their spiritual bodies. They did not sleep.
Several things are problematic with this statements that requires cognitive dissonance. (1) This passage never talks about those who die in the Lord after the second coming. (2) “Sleep” is a metaphor for physical death, so those who die in the Lord from that point forward means they “slept.” (slept is used concerning the dead body, asleep in the grave.) The person then went on to say,
When they put off the tent of their earthly body they transitioned into the heavenly kingdom as glorified sons and daughters.
The person’s comments suggest that upon entering heaven they received a brand-new heavenly body. She rejects the resurrection of a dead body from out of the tombs and believes the spiritual body is created in heaven and the old body continues to rest in the dirt which suggest a transmigration of the soul from one body into another.
The FP relies heavily upon the creed “Audience Relevance” and “timing dictates the nature” as shown above.
Then using the invented creed of “audience relevance” in a hyper way they add to the confusion. When your foundation is completely screwed up nothing will follow correctly.
Daniel talked about the end of the OC and the ending of the sacrificial system. The Olivet talked about the ending of the sacrificial system. NOT the second coming or the end of days.
Revelation talks about the end of days, when all things are completed and it’s the restoration of things where the curse is removed, and the earth is restored to its original glory. (that didn’t happen in AD 70) Jesus said I am the alpha and Omega, he is the completer of the plan of redemption, therefore it must have a day of consummation – for the former things have passed away.” – “Behold, I am making all things new.” This alone tells you this is the completion, the ending point. When he restores everything back to what it was like in the garden of Eden before the fall.
FP have rejected this idea of the ending of all things –“ for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, – I saw a new heaven and a new earth (which means everything under the sun is restored to be made like new.) They spiritualize this to mean the ending of the Old Covenant and the beginning of the New covenant took place in AD 70.
The last days of Revelation 19-22 are identified by:
1. His second coming. A physical, bodily coming down out of heaven of Jesus himself and he appears before all men.
2. The bodily resurrection of the dead, “the “physically” dead in Christ will rise first.”
3. The Millennium begins, with the resurrection of the saints and ends with the release of satan from his prison and the judgment of the ungodly when God destroys the world of the ungodly.
4. The GWT judgment ; Of all men “alpha and Omega”
5. New Heavens and Earth. the earth is restored to its original glory.
The idea that Time statements are more important than the “nature” statements is a deception created in the mnd of satan himself as something to feed those who are deceived. In any prophecy you have a – (Olivet)
1. Who? God/Christ (does not appear, does not come down)
2. What? Destroy the temple
3. When? In This Generation
4. Where? “Jerusalem”
5. How? Roman armies come and destroy Jerusalem in judgment of Israel.
In the event of his “second coming”
1. Who? Jesus
2. What? Jesus himself descends (appears) from heaven to earth to raise the dead and gather the saints
3. When? Now concerning the times and the seasons, brothers, you have no need to have anything written to you. 2For you yourselves are fully aware that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. (thieves do not announce or give signs when they are coming)
4. Where? The Mount of Olives
5. How? Physically and bodily. This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.” -The Lord himself will descend – and appear.
In the event of the “Resurrection of the dead”
1. Who? All who have physically died in Christ.
2. What? Come back to life.
3. When? AT His coming
4. Where? ALL Christians everywhere on the whole earth
5. How? for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, – The dead in Christ will rise first, then we who are alive when he comes, will be changed and we BOTH will meet him in the air as he comes down to this earth.
So in conclusion, if the FP declares the timing was AD 70 of his coming, of which no one said it was or that they saw him or did even one person declare he came spiritually. THEN to try to say the rest of the events of Revelation took place invisibly is simply not supported by any biblical text that talks about the nature of the event. In the process of interpretating scriptures they completely destroy the “nature’ statements and feel completely justified in butchering scriptures based on the timing they declare is AD 70 and yet no one person saw or understood anything was fulfilled from the Revelation account of what was to happen in the last days. Even if they had understood it was all to be fulfilled spiritually there was still complete ignorance in the first century church that AD 70 was a second coming. They only saw Jerusalem destroyed, which is never described in Revelation.
The FP is correct in saying no one saw him come down from out of heaven in AD 7 so they claim he had to come spiritually and invisibly yet, the bible says he will come and appear before all men, and all men will see him when He comes in power and glory. So where did the FP go wrong?
The Olivet is not about the second coming based on the language used by Jesus and his coming into his kingdom in heaven and receiving all authority to send judgment (Matt 26:52) . Paul stated that, in I Thess 4 it Says, “For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, … and the dead in Christ will rise first. ..” where in the Olivet does it say Jesus will come back to earth and appear?? IT doesn’t – in fact what does it say?
“If anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There he is!’ do not believe it.”
And Paul said what?
“For the Lord himself will come down from heaven.”
So if the Olivet says he is not coming down and appearing before men and Paul says he will at his coming then you have a contradiction you cannot reconcile with FP, hence its makes FP a false paradigm. Their interpretation contradicts scriptures, and the FP is worried about futurist ignoring time statement? And yet the FP completely destroys the nature statements and feel justified in their conclusions.
[1] N T Wright, Surprised by Hope, 125
[2] N T Wright, Surprised by Hope, 127
[3] N T Wright, Surprised by Hope, 135.
Leave a Reply