PDA

View Full Version : The two ages.


Etcetera
February 25th 2003, 03:37 PM
1.

The purpose of this post is to present the general Jewish expectation of the revolution of the ages. I submit that the Jews, from the days of the second temple until the time of the rabbis who compiled the Talmud, believed in the following three propositions.

1. This age will come to an end.

2. The age to come will not. It is everlasting.

3. There is a resurrection of the dead that will take place at the changeover between this age and the next.

As you read along you will no doubt notice many parallels to the wording of certain passages in the New Testament. I hope to explore some of them in another post.

1 Enoch was written well before the days of Christ:

1 Enoch 16:1-2: From the days of the slaughter and destruction and death of the giants, from the souls of whose flesh the spirits, having gone forth, shall destroy without incurring judgment, thus shall they destroy until the day of the consummation, the great judgment in which the age shall be consummated, yea, over the watchers and the godless shall be wholly consummated.

1 Enoch 71:14-16: And he said unto me: “He proclaims unto you peace in the name of the age to come, for from hence has proceeded peace since the creation of the world, and so shall it be unto you for ever and for ever and ever. And all shall walk in his ways since righteousness never forsakes him. With him will be their dwelling places, and with him their heritage, and they shall not be separated from him for ever and ever and ever. And so there shall be length of days with that son of man, and the righteous shall have peace and an upright way in the name of the Lord of spirits for ever and ever.”

The first passage speaks of a complete consummation at the end of the age. The second passage speaks of peace in the name of the age to come, then insists that the righteous will have peace forever and ever. Clearly, the peaceful days of the age to come are to go on forever. The age to come is conceived of as everlasting.

The life of Adam and Eve was written sometime in the first century B. C. or first century A. D., but definitely before the destruction of the temple in 70:

Life of Adam and Eve 51:1-3: When they had been mourning four days, Michael the archangel appeared and said to Seth: “Man of God, mourn not for your dead more than six days, for on the seventh day is the sign of the resurrection and the rest of the age to come; on the seventh day the Lord rested from all his works.”

Notice that the resurrection precedes the age to come, and that the age to come is characterized by rest, symbolized by the sabbath. The age to come is the age of the resurrected dead. It is eternity.

4 Ezra was written not too long after 70:

4 Ezra 2:34ff: Therefore I say to you, O nations that hear and understand: “Await your shepherd; he will give you everlasting rest, because he who will come at the end of the age is close at hand. Be ready for the rewards of the kingdom, because the eternal light will shine upon you for evermore. Flee from the shadow of this age, receive the joy of your glory; I publicly call on my savior to witness. Receive what the Lord has entrusted to you and be joyful, giving thanks to him who has called you to heavenly kingdoms.”

This passage associates the beginning (“he will give you”) of everlasting rest with the end of this age.

Josephus wrote in the 90’s of our era:

Josephus, War of the Jews, book 3, chapter 8: Do not you know that those who depart out of this life according to the law of nature, and pay that debt which was received from God, when he that lent it us is pleased to require it back again, enjoy eternal fame? That their houses and their posterity are sure, that their souls are pure and obedient and obtain a most holy place in heaven, from whence, in the revolution of ages, they are again sent into pure bodies?

At the revolution of the ages the righteous will be resurrected. One very fine scholar has this to say about this very passage:

N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God, page 324: [Josephus, War of the Jews, book 3, chapter 8] is as clear a statement of one mainline Jewish view as we could wish for. The righteous dead are presently in ‘heaven’, the domain of the creator god; but there is coming a new age,ha-‘olam ha-ba’ [literally, the coming age], in which the creation will be (not abolished, but) renewed; and the righteous dead will be given new bodies, precisely in order that they may inhabit the renewed earth.

The Talmud was written long after Christ. However, it consciously represents traditions that are much, much older. Much light has been shed on the words and deeds of Jesus and the apostles by this invaluable resource. I myself tend to treat it in this manner: Isolated traditions that are confirmed neither by the rest of the Talmud nor by the New Testament record are probably late. But traditions to which all the rabbi contributors seem to subscribe throughout the Talmud are probably early.

The fact that the age to come was supposed to be everlasting is one of the latter traditions. I myself have not read the entire Talmud. But I have searched out as many references to the age to come as I can, and they all seem to agree that it is everlasting. I have not yet found a dissenting voice.

Below are also some references to the Targums.

The age to come is the age of eternal rewards:

Aboth de Rabbi Nathan: Rabbi Judah ben Elai said: “One who makes the words of the torah primary and other matters secondary will be made primary in the age to come. But one who makes the way of the world primary and the words of the torah secondary will be made secondary in the age to come.”

Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 98a: Rabbi Joshua ben Levi met Elijah standing at the door of Rabbi Simeon ben Yo‘hai’s tomb. He said to him: “Will I inherit the age to come?” [Elijah] said: “If the Lord here [adon hazeh] is willing!” ...then he said to [Elijah]: “When will the messiah come?” Elijah said to him: “Go ask him yourself!” ....[Joshua] came back to Elijah, who said to him...: “He promised you and your father the age to come!”

Midrash, Bereshith Rabba 62.2: All the reward intended for the righteous is ready for them in the age to come; and, while they are still in this age, the holy one (blessed be he!) lets them see the reward that he is prepared to give them in the age to come. And their souls are satisfied, and they fall asleep.

Mishna, Aboth 3.12: Rabbi Eleazar of Modi’im said: He who profanes holy things and spurns the set times, he who exposes his colleague in public, he who voids the covenant of our father Abraham, he who discovers parts of the torah contradicting halakah, he has no share in the age to come, even if he has a grasp of torah and good deeds.

Targum, [pseudo-] Jonathan on Genesis 3:24: The torah is better than the fruit of the tree of life to one who observes it and walks in the paths of the way of life. For the word of Yahweh prepared it for man to keep so that he may settle in the age to come.

The age to come is everlasting:

Targum, [pseudo-] Jonathan on Exodus 15:18: When the people of the house of Israel saw the signs and wonders which the Holy One (may his name be praised!) did at the Red Sea and the power of his hand between the waves, they responded and said to one another: “Come! Let us put the crown of majesty on the head of our redeemer! For his is the crown of the kingdom! He is the king of kings in this age and his is the kingdom for the age to come! His it is and his it shall be forever and ever!”

Notice the parallelism of that last line:

1A. He is the king of kings in this age....

1B. ...and his is the kingdom for the age to come.

2A. His it is ....

2B. ...and his it shall be [in the future] forever and ever.

The kingdom for the age to come is thus parallel to the kingdom that will belong to God forever and ever. The age to come is everlasting.

The age to come is the time of the great eschatological banquet:

Midrash, Shemoth Rabba 25.7: Likewise, in the age to come he will spread a table for them, and they will recline and eat in the garden of Eden. And the star-worshippers shall see their customs and laws, as it says: “See, my servants shall eat and you shall hunger!”

Berakoth 17a: A familiar word in the mouth of Rab: “In the age to come there is no eating and drinking, no propagating or multiplying, no bearing or giving birth, no envy, no hatred, no strife. But the righteous rest, wearing crowns on their heads, and share in the glory of the [I]shekinah, of which it is said: ‘And they saw God and ate and drank.’”

If anyone reading this post can find or has already found a Jewish text that discusses eschatological history in terms of, for instance, three ages or what-not, please let me know. I have been researching the two ages for a few months now, and would really like to know that I am sifting all the available data.

Nota bene: I have concentrated in this post only on those passages that actually mention an end of the age or an age to come. There are many, many more passages that are most intelligible on the premise that there are only two ages, but do not actually use that terminology.

I conclude this post with a few words from historical Jesus scholar N. T. Wright:

N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God, pages 299-300: One of the central ways of expressing this hope [of Israel] was the division of time into two eras: the present age and the age to come. The present age was a time when the creator god seemed to be hiding his face; the age to come would see the renewal of the created world. The present age was the time of Israel’s misery; in the age to come she would be restored. In the present age wicked men seemed to be flourishing; in the age to come they would receive their just reward. In the present age even Israel was not really keeping the Torah perfectly, was not really being YHWH’s true humanity; in the age to come all Israel would keep Torah from the heart.

N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God, pages 331-332: Resurrection is the divine reward for martyrs; it is what will happen after the great tribulation. But it is not simply a special reward for those who have undergone special sufferings. Rather, the eschatological expectation of most Jews of this period was for a renewal, not an abandonment, of the present space-time order as a whole, and themselves within it. Since this was based on the justice and mercy of the creator god, the god of Israel, it was inconceivable that those who had died in the struggle to bring the new world into being should be left out of the blessing when it eventually broke upon the nation and thence on the world.... To write this seems almost uncontroversial as a historical summary of Jewish belief. Dozens of texts of the period point this way; we are on absolutely firm ground.

For your informed consideration.

Etcetera.

:read:

Etcetera
February 25th 2003, 03:40 PM
2.

Here I intend to look at a few of the New Testament references to this age or the age to come, and to compare them with the general Jewish expectations outlined in the first post. Did Jesus or the apostles have a different set of expectations? Or did they too believe in the following three propositions?

1. This age will come to an end.

2. The age to come will not. It is everlasting.

3. There is a resurrection of the dead that will take place at the changeover between this age and the next.

There is to be a great judgment at the end of this age:

Matthew 13:36-43: Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying: “Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.” He answered and said to them: “He who sows the good seed is the son of man. The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one. The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. Therefore, as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. The son of man will send out his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their father. He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

Matthew 13:47-50: Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet that was cast into the sea and gathered some of every kind, which, when it was full, they drew to shore; and they sat down and gathered the good into vessels, but threw the bad away. So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come forth, separate the wicked from among the just, and cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

This sounds very much like the total consummation (“all things”) of 1 Enoch:

1 Enoch 16:1-2: From the days of the slaughter and destruction and death of the giants, from the souls of whose flesh the spirits, having gone forth, shall destroy without incurring judgment, thus shall they destroy until the day of the consummation, the great judgment in which the age shall be consummated, yea, over the watchers and the godless shall be wholly consummated.

There are references that imply that there are only two ages:

Matthew 12:32: And, whoever shall speak a word against the son of man, it shall be forgiven him. But, whoever shall speak against the holy spirit, it shall be forgiven him neither in this age nor in the age to come.

Mark 3:28-29: Truly I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter, but whoever blasphemes against the holy spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin.

Note that Mark holds out no forgiveness at all for this particular sin. (The same goes for Luke 12:10.) Yet Matthew simply says that there will be no forgiveness either in this age or in the age to come. If there are three or more ages, the question naturally arises: “Well, what about the age after the age to come? Will this sin be forgiven then?” It is far more natural to suppose that the two ages mentioned comprise the whole of eternity.

Consider the characteristics of this age:

Matthew 13:22: And the one on whom see was sown among thorns, this the man who hears the word, and the worry of the age and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful.

Mark 4:19: ...and the worries of the age, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the desires for other things enter in and choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful.

1 Timothy 6:17: Charge those who are rich in this age not to be high-minded....

2 Timothy 4:10: For Demas, having loved this present age, has forsaken me....

This reminds us of:

From 4 Ezra 2: Flee from the shadow of this age....

This age is characterized by worries, by unhealthy attachment to riches, by shadow. But what about the next age? On a three-age scale the next age, too, has worry and shadow. So what would be the point of limiting mention of worry or shadow to this age?

Mark 10:29-30: Jesus said: “Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or lands for my sake and for the sake of the gospel that shall not receive now in this time a hundredfold in houses, and brothers, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come life eternal.”

Luke 18:29-30: And he said to them: “Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house, or wife, or brothers, or parents, or children for the sake of the kingdom of God that shall not receive many times as much at this time, and in the age to come life eternal.”

Eternal life is to be doled out in the age to come. Much like:

Midrash, Bereshith Rabba 62.2: All the reward intended for the righteous is ready for them in the age to come; and, while they are still in this age, the holy one (blessed be he!) lets them see the reward that he is prepared to give them in the age to come. And their souls are satisfied, and they fall asleep.

The age to come is the age when all will be rectified. It is in the age to come that the righteous will receive their reward.

The age to come is also the age of resurrected life:

Luke 20:34-35: The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those counted worthy to have part in that age, and the resurrection from among the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; for neither can they die any more, for they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

This passage resembles:

Berakoth 17a: A familiar word in the mouth of Rab: “In the age to come there is no eating and drinking, no propagating or multiplying, no bearing or giving birth, no envy, no hatred, no strife. But the righteous rest, wearing crowns on their heads, and share in the glory of the shekinah, of which it is said: ‘And they saw God and ate and drank.’”

I am aware of some of the gymnastics used to get out of the plain meaning of Luke 20:34-35. But the natural reading shines through:

Justin Martyr, On the Resurrection 3: And at the same time he foretold that in the future age sexual intercourse should be done away with, as he says: “The children of this age marry and are given in marriage, but the children of the age to come neither marry nor are given in marriage, but shall be like the angels in heaven.”

Tertullian, Against Marcion 4.38: Because the question concerned the next age, and he was going to declare that no one marries there, he opens the way by laying down the principles that here, where there is death, there is also marriage: “But they whom God shall account worthy of the possession of that age and the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage; forasmuch as they cannot die any more, since they become equal to the angels, being made the children of God and of the resurrection.”

I find that there is absolutely nothing in the apostolic writings to suggest any structure other than the two ages discussed in the previous post.

Again, if anyone knows of any New Testament passage that teaches three ages, let me know.

Etcetera.

:read:

Darth Xena
February 25th 2003, 03:49 PM
Dear Etcetera:

Because of my workload, this is way down in the pile. Obviously I strenously disagree. And the answer is to be found systematically and synoptically. But I will get there....

Etcetera
February 25th 2003, 11:41 PM
Dee Dee:

You are welcome to respond quickly or slowly, or not at all, at your leisure. The main point here, as I stated, is to find any text that actually teaches three ages, or something other than two ages. Technically, then, a synoptic analysis does not qualify, but, if you think that such an analysis will do the trick, by all means post it. My ears are open.

Etcetera.

:yipee:

(The above emoticon has absolutely no connection to this post. I just like it.)

GrayPilgrim
February 25th 2003, 11:53 PM
Etcetera,

I want to commend you on the amount of work that you have done here. Your work in the Rabinic Sources shows something that I have long seen among those who claim that the New Perspective aggresively supports the Preterist position, a lack of particulars in htier treatmetn of the Rabinic and Second Temple Sources. Itis interesting to note that Enochic Judaism is the one thing that EP Sanders could not fit into his schema and thus had to label "defective". So once again, good work.


:yipee: :yipee: :yipee:

{he is great, ain't he]

Solly
February 26th 2003, 03:40 AM
Etcetera.

Greetings, welcome to TOL.

Good work on the Jewish background; have you read Ridderbos' Coming of the Kingdom where he lays out a lot of this material to show the disparity between Jewish expectations and Jesus' preaching?

If you have seen my End of the Ages thread, then you will know that I am working on a rebuttal of the "three-ages" view. I was for a while lured by DDs charms to accept a praeterist interpretation of Matt 24 (with consequences for the interpretation of Thessalonians and Revelation) but have now drawn back from that, as I now see more how it undergirds the Neo-post millennial doctrine of the DeMar/Gentry circle.

I agree there are only two ages, but I wonder what character you ascribe to each, and where you draw the line between them? Or do you accept the "overlap" view of Vos/Ridderbos etc?

Have a banana :yipee:

Etcetera
February 26th 2003, 10:07 AM
GrayPilgrim:

Greetings in the name above all names.

I want to commend you on the amount of work that you have done here. Your work in the Rabinic Sources shows something that I have long seen among those who claim that the New Perspective aggresively supports the Preterist position, a lack of particulars in htier treatmetn of the Rabinic and Second Temple Sources. Itis interesting to note that Enochic Judaism is the one thing that EP Sanders could not fit into his schema and thus had to label "defective". So once again, good work.

Thank you very much. I have read Sanders in part, but am not familiar with what you call his "schema." Perhaps you could elaborate a bit.

In my use of the Rabbinic sources I am completely at the mercy of the translators, mind you. If you see a flaw in any of the translations, by all means speak up. What languages do you know, anyway? I myself majored in the Classics (Greek and Latin), and taught myself just enough Hebrew to be dangerous. Am perfectly lost in Aramaic. Speak Spanish fluently (as if that helped when reading, say, the Didache).

In the holy name.

Etcetera.

Etcetera
February 26th 2003, 10:24 AM
Solly:

Good work on the Jewish background; have you read Ridderbos' Coming of the Kingdom where he lays out a lot of this material to show the disparity between Jewish expectations and Jesus' preaching?

Thank you. No, I have not read that book. But thank you for the reference. I just may have to check it out.

If you have seen my End of the Ages thread, then you will know that I am working on a rebuttal of the "three-ages" view.

Yes, I have seen that.

I was for a while lured by DDs charms to accept a praeterist interpretation of Matt 24 (with consequences for the interpretation of Thessalonians and Revelation) but have now drawn back from that, as I now see more how it undergirds the Neo-post millennial doctrine of the DeMar/Gentry circle.

Lured? Is she a siren? :wink:

I agree there are only two ages, but I wonder what character you ascribe to each, and where you draw the line between them? Or do you accept the "overlap" view of Vos/Ridderbos etc?

I am trying my hand at the impossible: Accept the correspondence of Matthew 24 and 1 Thessalonians 4-5, accept the time references as given, and yet acknowledge that we are not yet in the age to come. I am convinced that it can be done, based on a strange phenomenon that I have spotted in a few texts. The end result, I think, will cut right across premillennialism and postmillennialism, practically ignoring some of the vital distinctions made by each (precisely because the ancient texts ignored them). But I have lots and lots of footwork yet to do on the subject.

In the meantime, I try not to ignore the obvious, like the parallelism of Olivet and Paul's eschatology, which postmillennialism as it stands now must completely suppress, or the time references, which premillennialism must fudge on.

Sorry to remain so cryptic, and my efforts might prove a colossal failure in the end, but I look forward to reading your stuff.

I am going to list some of the more "controversial" parallels to the Olivet material on Calvinist's thread on the discourse fairly soon, including 1 Thessalonians 4-5. If you can add anything to it, please feel free.

In him.

Etcetera.

Solly
February 26th 2003, 10:37 AM
A starting point might be that, with the OT, we must accept the end of the world, with the general resurrection, "second" coming, and judgement, as THE end, and work back from that.
If the real end is the Last Day, a day of judgment and salvation, then the first coming is subsumed under that and does not have the priority, it is God's movement of grace, his kingly reign extending itself to fallen man ahead of the wrath to come. That is also why there is no "millennial kingdom" as premills and post mills see it. The Dam has burst, the wrath of God is revealed from heaven, etc, in men's consciences, in the Gospel, in the fall of Israel. Like a tsunami is it crashing down through human history and will sweep all before it, even creation: Flee from the wrath to come, believe the Gospel.
It is not that we are in a millennial age prior to the age to come, but that the age to come has arrived, is at hand, firstly in Christ the Eschatological Victor, then in the eschatological gift of the Holy Spirit, and then in the eschatological community, the Church.

Post millers profer a theology of Glory, much as the Plymouth Brethren did with their talk of union with Christ in heaven now. But the truth is a theology of the Cross and Grace, waiting for the blessed hope.

Etcetera
February 26th 2003, 10:50 AM
Solly:

You and I may be taking very different tacks on this issue. The issue that I am fiddling with is the end of "this" age, not the beginning of the age to come. And I do see room for a so-called millennial reign.

Nevertheless, I am intrigued. Given that we both posit only two ages, iron may yet sharpen iron.

Shalom.

Etcetera.

Post-script: Say, what does Solly mean?

Solly
February 26th 2003, 10:54 AM
I tell you a great mystery: Solly means Solly.

My surname is Solomon

Btw, grab an avatar, now you're over 25 posts.

The issue that I am fiddling with is the end of "this" age, not the beginning of the age to come. And I do see room for a so-called millennial reign.


Hmmm, this should be interesting. But not a three ager? For myself this age ends when the next one starts, the eternal age. But the eternal age has started in the coming of Christ now, and this age has begun to end now: the Fall of Jerusalem being the most prominent sign of that. That is the overlap view. Matt 24 was the beginning of the end, but the end is not yet; we are in the last days, but not the Last Day.

GrayPilgrim
February 26th 2003, 11:10 AM
02-26-2003 @ 10:07 AM
Etcetera:

GrayPilgrim:

Greetings in the name above all names.



Thank you very much. I have read Sanders in part, but am not familiar with what you call his "schema." Perhaps you could elaborate a bit.


Sanders, et al see that Second Temple Judaism followed what he labeled Covenental Nomism--that is you are saved by grace but you keep the law to maintain your covenental relationship with Yahweh. Unfortunately, I think he has flattened out Second Temple Judaism in the prosecution of the argument, hence he calls 1 Enoch "defective".


In my use of the Rabbinic sources I am completely at the mercy of the translators, mind you. If you see a flaw in any of the translations, by all means speak up. What languages do you know, anyway? I myself majored in the Classics (Greek and Latin), and taught myself just enough Hebrew to be dangerous. Am perfectly lost in Aramaic. Speak Spanish fluently (as if that helped when reading, say, the Didache).

In the holy name.

Etcetera.

What translation are you using? My father-in-law gave me Blackman's translation of the Mishna for graduation, the nice thing is its interlinear and has the Hebrewon the same page.

I have studied Hebrew (Biblical, Dead Sea Scrolls, Mishnaic, Mideaval, Modern; each one has its own syntax and vocab so they are in effect different languages), Ugaritic, Koine Greek (by far my weakest language) and German. I worked on Aramaic for a few months a number of years ago, but plan on teaching myself Aramaic after I finish with my current German class in which I am translating Wellhausen's Prologomena zur Geschichte Israels.

Grace and Peace,
GP

Solly
February 26th 2003, 11:42 AM
I have studied Hebrew (Biblical, Dead Sea Scrolls, Mishnaic, Mideaval, Modern; each one has its own syntax and vocab so they are in effect different languages), Ugaritic, Koine Greek (by far my weakest language) and German. I worked on Aramaic for a few months a number of years ago, but plan on teaching myself Aramaic after I finish with my current German class in which I am translating Wellhausen's Prologomena zur Geschichte Israels.


Sigh, and I am still mastering English and Old High Gibberish..
:duh: :dunce: :dufus:

GrayPilgrim
February 26th 2003, 12:01 PM
Oh I'm a master of gibberish most of the time, and notice I didn't say anything about having English mastered!

Solly
February 26th 2003, 12:08 PM
wlle, I ahd notced htato ne.

GrayPilgrim
February 26th 2003, 12:14 PM
How'd you get me to type your post?

Darth Xena
February 26th 2003, 11:34 PM
Dear Solly:

I would be interested in what you come up with.. I still see a major problem if I am understanding you correctly.

Solly
February 27th 2003, 04:46 AM
Hmm, very interested I don't doubt, but calm yourself my dear, you're getting too excited.

Darth Xena
February 27th 2003, 07:55 AM
LOL!!! That is great!! That may be a new avatar option when I do my debate with Farrell Till!!!