Wierd thought for my fellow preterists

[dizzle]

Okay guys I have been further developing my systematic eshcatology and something has occured to me. It may be off base, but I am developing it.

Is Christ "coming" at this very moment? Will this "coming" be consummated by His Final Advent?

I hope I don't sound too wierd but i am definitely going somewhere with this.

[studyhound]

Not sure you may have to flesh it out, like what do you mean by


Is Christ "coming" at this very moment?

:studyhound:

[Chief of Staff Lizard]

I agree.



It's weird. :huh:


Not sure where you're going with this, but it should be interesting.

[dizzle]

I am not sure I can articulate it properly. But here is one thought:

In doing so here is an excerpt from a discussion with Gordon Freeman:

Matthew 26:64- Hereinafter [which is literally translated ‘from this point on’]
you shall see the Son of Man sitting on the Right Hand of Power and coming on
the clouds of Heaven.

Note that carefully. Jesus claimed that His “coming” was beginning then and that
His coming would consist of both “comng” and “sitting” – where? In heaven! At
the right hand of power, perfectly in accord with Daniel 7 (and I would add
Psalm 110 which is the most important OT passage in the NT unbeknownst to too
many Christians, and in extreme discordance with attempting to see this as the
Second Comng.

I think in a very real sense, "HIs coming" is His reign. He is judging right now isn't He? I see here Jesus makes His Messianic reign an "aspect" of HIs coming.

I am not trying to press this too too far, but I think His sitting and coming are two aspects of the same thing, and it is personalized when expressed towards a particular group, such as a nation being judged, or a person being converted.

[dizzle]

In other words, I think the term is even more fluid than we preterists give it credit for.

[studyhound]

I am not sure I can articulate it properly. But here is one thought:

In doing so here is an excerpt from a discussion with Gordon Freeman:

Matthew 26:64- Hereinafter [which is literally translated ‘from this point on’]
you shall see the Son of Man sitting on the Right Hand of Power and coming on
the clouds of Heaven.

Note that carefully. Jesus claimed that His “coming” was beginning then and that
His coming would consist of both “comng” and “sitting” – where? In heaven! At
the right hand of power, perfectly in accord with Daniel 7 (and I would add
Psalm 110 which is the most important OT passage in the NT unbeknownst to too
many Christians, and in extreme discordance with attempting to see this as the
Second Comng.

I think in a very real sense, "HIs coming" is His reign. He is judging right now isn't He? I see here Jesus makes His Messianic reign an "aspect" of HIs coming.

I am not trying to press this too too far, but I think His sitting and coming are two aspects of the same thing, and it is personalized when expressed towards a particular group, such as a nation being judged, or a person being converted.
:hrm: Something to think about. Interesting.


:studyhound:

[GhostontheNet]

Isn't there a split in the subject between the sitting at the right hand of power and the coming on the clouds? Acts 7 54-56 has this; 54Now when they heard these things they were enraged, and they ground their teeth at him. 55But he, full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. 56And he said, "Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God." ESV declaring that the sitting at the right hand is fulfilled. However, the text at Matthew 26:64 then says "and coming in the clouds of heaven." The "and" could mark an important shift of subject to be differentiated from the previous subject of the sitting on the right hand. Assuming the Hegesippus cite in Eusebius is accurate, James agrees;
Why do you question me about the Son of Man? I tell you, He is sitting in heaven at the right hand of the Great Power, and He will come on the clouds of heaven. Ecclessiastical History 23. Penguin Classics.
Here James states that the Son of Man is already sitting at the right power but will come on the clouds of heaven in the future.

[Ted]

DeeDee,

I'm not sure you have a correct translation of Matt 26:64. The word translated "hereinafter" is apo. BADG translates this as "a marker to indicate separation from a place, whether person or thing, from, away from."

In other words, it speaks of a later time, not continuing from "now."

Ted

[John Reece]

DeeDee,

I'm not sure you have a correct translation of Matt 26:64. The word translated "hereinafter" is apo. BADG translates this as "a marker to indicate separation from a place, whether person or thing, from, away from."

In other words, it speaks of a later time, not continuing from "now."

Ted

Uh oh . . .

Ted,

The word "hereinafter" is not a rendering of a single word; rather, it is a rendering of a prepositional phrase in which "apo" is the preposition.

In Matthew 26:64, the transliteration "apo" (apo) is a preposition in the prepositional phrase ap' arti - the omicron at the end of "apo" is elided in the prepositional phrase, because it precedes the initial vowel in "arti".

An accurate rendering of the phrase is "from now on", as in the English Standard Version:

Matthew 26

64 Jesus said to him, "You have said so. But I tell you, from now on (ap' arti) you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven." (ESV)

John

[dizzle]

Another post of yours I am giong to keep John. Any other information you can give me on this is appreciated. This verse is very pivotal to understanding the first century "coming" of Christ.

Ghost, let me get back with you. As a preterist, I would not think you would have an issue with my supporting premise, though maybe my conclusions (tentative). The sitting AND coming is pretty common preterist apologetic.

[John Reece]

Another post of yours I am going to keep, John. Any other information you can give me on this is appreciated. This verse is very pivotal to understanding the first century "coming" of Christ.

Okey-dokey . . .

From Matthew (TNTC), by R. T. France:

Coming on the clouds of heaven (together with the phrase ‘the Son of man’) is a clear allusion to Daniel 7:13, already similarly alluded to in 24:30. . . . We have seen that its natural application in terms of its Old Testament source is to the vindication and enthronement of the Son of man in heaven, not to a descent to earth. It is therefore in this verse a parallel expression to ‘seated at the right hand of Power’; the two phrases refer to the same exhalted state, not to two successive situations or events. In this verse the appropriateness of this interpretation is underlined by the fact that this is to be true ‘from now on’ (hereafter is a quite misleading rendering of the more specific phrase ap’ arti, which, as in 23:39 and 26:29, denotes a new period beginning from now). Indeed it is something which Jesus’ inquisitors themselves will see (an echo of Zc. 12:10, and in 24:30?), for it will quickly become apparent in the events of even the next few weeks (not to mention the subsequent growth of the church) that the ‘blasphemer’ they thought they had disposed of is in fact now in the position of supreme authority.


From Jesus and the Old Testament (pages 140-142), by R. T. France:

Mark 14:62; (Mt. 26:64 . . .) Again the allusion to Daniel 7:13 is not in question. What has been very much in debate in recent years is the sort of fulfillment for which Jesus looks. Until recently it was almost universally assumed that this was a prediction of the Parousia, but this interpretation is now frequently questioned. It is suggested instead that in Mark 14:62 Jesus is taking Daniel 7:13 in just the sense in which it was originally intended, that is, as describing his imminent vindication and exaltation to supreme authority. His judges may accuse and condemn him, but they will soon see that the one they condemn has become their lord and king. The sitting at God’s right hand and the coming with clouds are not, then, two events separated by an indefinite period of time, but two figures for the single idea of the vindication and exaltation of the Son of man. His ‘coming’ is not a coming to earth, but, as in Daniel 7:13, a coming to God to receive power and glory, and is, of course, not to be interpreted literally: a literal ‘sitting’ and a literal ‘coming’ could hardly be envisaged together!

The exegesis is supported not only by the fact that it is reasonable to assume that Jesus used Daniel 7:13 in its intended sense unless there is evidence to the contrary, but also the word oyesqe (‘you will see’), which implies that those sitting in judgment over Jesus will in fact witness the ‘coming’, i.e. that it will occur within their lifetime. This is confirmed by the Matthean ap’ arti (Lk. apo tou nun, ‘from now on’). If, as Glasson argues, this phrase was originally in Mark, it makes explicit what is already implied in oyesqe, that Jesus is not referring to an event in the indefinite future, but to a situation which is to obtain immediately.

The primary note, then, of this allusion to Daniel 7:13 is, as in the original meaning of that chapter, one of vindication, and the conferment of power and authority on the Son of man. Jesus, the defendant and victim, will be exhalted to be lord and king. But while this continuing state is the primary point of the application, oyesqe suggests that some particular manifestation of this lordship within history is in view, and that it will be within the lifetime of his hearers. When we compare this with the similar implication that we have seen in Mark 8:38 and Matthew 10:23, there seems to be good reason for taking all three passages as parallel to Mark 13:26, where the context is explicitly that of the destruction of Jerusalem, and for suggesting that Jesus saw this act of judgment on the nation which judged and rejected him as the visible manifestation of that vindication and lordship which was soon to be conferred on him. In Mark 14:62, where Jesus, the apparently helpless defendant, is addressing the leaders of the nation, this application is singularly appropriate.


From The Gospel of Mark (NIGTC, page 612), by R. T. France (comment re Mark 14:62):

The combination of Ps. 110:1 and Dn. 7:13 produces a mixture of metaphors which some have found troubling, in that they cannot envisage anyone both ‘sitting’ and ‘coming’, at least in that order. (The problem is compounded if the ‘coming’ is interpreted as a coming to earth, but since that is not what either Daniel or Mark says we need not pursue that red herring.) It has therefore sometimes been assumed that the simple kai with which Mark links the two metaphors conceals a time break: first sitting and then subsequently coming. But this again is not what Mark says, and the whole problem arises from a failure to interpret familiar OT metaphors as such, metaphors. Both passages in fact express in their distinctive ways the same concept of a sovereign authority. This is obvious in the case of the psalm, ‘sitting at the right hand of [God]’, but if Dn. 7:13 is read in context it conveys the same message, in that the one who comes before God in the clouds of heaven is immediately given ‘dominion and glory and kingship’ which are both universal and unending. . . . Dn. 7:13-14 is, in other words, no less that Psalm 110:1 an enthronement oracle, and it is that universal and unending dominion which Jesus here declares that he himself will now receive – and they will see it.

[John Reece]

Dee Dee,

The following is an addendum to the post above.

Here is a pity comment on Matthew 26:64, by W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann in The Anchor Bible: Matthew, page 333:

from now on . . . The Greek is quite emphatic. Those listening to Jesus are asked to see in the person surrounded by enemies The-Man-in-glory, the cloud rider of Dan 7:13 ff. (cf Ps 110:1). In a very real sense this is the climax of all that Matthew's tradition has so carefully preserved for us in the sayings about The Man. Though Jesus does not say "You will see me," the identification is plain enough to his hearers.

[Ted]

I sent your comments verbatim to my family Greek scholar. Here is his verbatim response.

I reviewed what you sent. If someone is trying to make a hard timeline for seeing Jesus at the right hand of the Father, they are wrong. Jesus is just assuring the high priest that he will some time after the immediate events he will see Jesus in a position of judging the world. This constitutes the clear claim of divinity as recognized by the High Priest.

Technically, "ap' arti" does not give a meaning much more than sometime after now such as "later".Even stretching the meaning of 'apo' could lead to the idea of "because of this meeting...."

Personally, I prefer to leave it simple. Only the rest of scripture will give the time of the completion of Jesus' prophecy.

[dizzle]

Well Ted, John Reece is extraordinary proficient in Greek and has a different opinion. It is remarkably easy to prove that mine (John's) is the correct rendering through the use of other passages as well.

[studyhound]

I am not sure I can articulate it properly. But here is one thought:

In doing so here is an excerpt from a discussion with Gordon Freeman:

Matthew 26:64- Hereinafter [which is literally translated ‘from this point on’]
you shall see the Son of Man sitting on the Right Hand of Power and coming on
the clouds of Heaven.

Note that carefully. Jesus claimed that His “coming” was beginning then and that
His coming would consist of both “comng” and “sitting” – where? In heaven! At
the right hand of power, perfectly in accord with Daniel 7 (and I would add
Psalm 110 which is the most important OT passage in the NT unbeknownst to too
many Christians, and in extreme discordance with attempting to see this as the
Second Comng.

I think in a very real sense, "HIs coming" is His reign. He is judging right now isn't He? I see here Jesus makes His Messianic reign an "aspect" of HIs coming.

I am not trying to press this too too far, but I think His sitting and coming are two aspects of the same thing, and it is personalized when expressed towards a particular group, such as a nation being judged, or a person being converted.
I have a thought on this I not sure if it fits but it seems like it just might. Like you I am just kicking this around, so may not make sense just yet. Plus I am trying to remember this conversation off the cuff. I was talking to a friend today over coffee, and he had just come to the conclusions that pre-trib theology is not what the bible teaches, but the only problem is now he has a void to fill. So he was questioning me about my beliefs. When I gave him a skeleton overview of preterism I got the common questions about what I believe, and the preterist view.

The one question that we spent the most time on and branched off in to other areas of theology was the questions of “If there is no future tribulation, what good is the fulfilled sections of the NT and where did we go from here?”

Since becoming a preterist that question has always seem so strange because of the obvious glaring problem of OT fulfilled prophecies. But seeing as my friend was earnestly seeking and asking honest questions I spent the time to run down side questions and rabbit trails on this first point.

The second, to make a long discussion short, point was that Christ is on his throne and that the Christian mandate is evangelism and discipleship. As a preterist I am not restricted by a theology that has the church becoming anemic and failing in its task, but growing, and filling the earth. Also the focus is not on what is going to happen to the church in an apostate condition but as believer become mature what a church full of mature believers can do to change the world.

(An interesting side point here, I heard that the Jewish idea of a disciple is not just one who follows after his teacher, one who becomes a reflection of their teacher, teaching what their teacher taught and being the kind of person their teacher was/is. Gives a different twist on discipleship and Christ likeness.)



I am losing the conversation I had with my friend so I will end here and dwell on it for a few days and maybe a couple of points I want to touch on will com back to me.



(stupid brain . . . . I’ll stab you with a Q-tip)



:studyhound:

[John Reece]

. . . my family Greek scholar. . .

:smile:

I have matched your "family Greek scholar" and raised you two (see posts #11 and #12 above).

Here is another, from C. C. Torrey, who was the founder and first director of the American School of Oriental research in Jerusalem in 1900-1901 and Professor of Semitic Studies at Yale 1900-1932 (and Professor Emeritus until his death in 1956, when Yale University Press published his last book).


The ap' arti of Matthew renders the same word which in Luke is rendered by apo to nun, namely the Aramaic mkCN
“straightway, very soon, in the immediate future” . . . -- Documents of the Christian Church, pages 84 and 85

The preeminent lexical standard for New Testament Greek is A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker. Here is the definition given therein for arti and ap' arti:


arti 1. as classical, of the immediate past, just . . . 2. also as classical, of the immediate present at once, immediately, now . . . 3. Later Greek uses arti of the present in general now, at the present time . . . –Used with preposition ap' arti from now on.

That's what the authors of The Anchor Bible: Matthew (see post #12 above) meant when they wrote "from now on . . . The Greek is quite emphatic."

Oops! I misspelled pithy in post #12, and the time limit on editing has expired :smile: .

[dizzle]

More to save!

[John Reece]

:smile:

I have seen your "family Greek scholar" and raised you two (see posts #11 and #12 above).

Here is another, from C. C. Torrey, who was the founder and first director of the American School of Oriental Research in Jerusalem in 1900-1901 and Professor of Semitic Studies at Yale 1900-1932 (and Professor Emeritus until his death in 1956, when Yale University Press published his last book).


The ap' arti of Matthew renders the same word which in Luke is rendered by apo to nun, namely the Aramaic mkCN “straightway, very soon, in the immediate future” . . .-- Documents of the Christian Church, pages 84 and 85

The preeminent lexical standard for New Testament Greek is A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker. Here is the definition given therein for arti and ap' arti:


arti 1. as classical, of the immediate past, just . . . 2. also as classical, of the immediate present at once, immediately, now . . . 3. Later Greek uses arti of the present in general now, at the present time . . . –Used with preposition ap' arti from now on.

That's what the authors of The Anchor Bible: Matthew (see post #12 above) meant when they wrote "from now on . . . The Greek is quite emphatic."

Oops! I misspelled pithy ("pity" is the error) in post #12, and the time limit on editing has expired :smile: .

I don't play poker (card games); so, in the original post of the quote above, I mangled an expression I've heard used in movies. It's too late to edit it, so I have made a correction in the first line of the quote above.

Such fun being a perfectionist :smile: . . .

. . . especially when one's mind is addled by age and illness . . . :doh:

[John Reece]

. . Any other information you can give me on this is appreciated. . . .

Dee Dee,

The following is an edited version of something I wrote for my web site in the 1990s. The basic exegesis had been done before I read C. C. Torrey’s Documents of the Christian Church and the commentaries quoted in this excerpt from the web site, which contains some original exegesis not presented above.

From Now (circa AD30) On

ap’ arti (ahp AHR-tee): from now on

Matthew 26:59-66

The chief priests and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for evidence against Jesus, however false, on which they might have him executed. But they could not find any, though several lying witnesses come forward. Eventually two came forward and made a statement, 'This man said, "I have power to destroy the Temple of God and in three days build it up."' The high priest then rose and said to him, 'Have you no answer to that? What is this evidence these men are bringing against you?' But Jesus was silent. And the high priest said to him, 'I put you on oath by the living God to tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.' Jesus answered him, 'It is you who say it. But, I tell you that from this time onward (ap’ arti) you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.' Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, 'He has blasphemed. What need of witnesses have we now? There! You have just heard the blasphemy. What is your opinion?' They answered, 'He deserves to die.' (The New Jerusalem Bible)

The high priest did not appreciate what Jesus said by way of allusion to the prophetic scriptures in Psalm 110:1 and Daniel 7:13: He (Jesus) is the One referred to in the prophecy of the Messiah being seated at the right hand of God (Psalm 110:1). He is the Son of man ... coming on the clouds of heaven (Daniel 7:13). The high priest had presuppositions about the Messiah that were quite different from what he was seeing in and hearing from Jesus.

In a sense, Christians likewise do not appreciate what Jesus said by way of allusion to the prophetic scriptures in Psalm 110:1 and Daniel 7:13: What Christians do not appreciate is not the assertion by Jesus that Daniel 7:13-14 is fulfilled in him. What Christians do not appreciate, in the text quoted above, is Jesus' specification of the time of fulfillment of Daniel 7:13-14 and the nature of the fulfillment which the time specification declared by Jesus necessarily indicates.

There is reason to think that such a deficit of appreciation accounts for the blurred rendering of ap’ arti in the NASB and in the NIV of Matthew 26:64 (the NJB quote above is accurate). The prepositional phrase ap’ arti occurs six times in the New Testament.

Below is a list of how the NASB and the NIV translate the phrase ap’ arti in each of the six verses.

Matthew 23:39 ------ NASB: from now on --------- NIV: again

Matthew 26:29 ------ NASB: from now on --------- NIV: from now on

Matthew 26:64 ------ NASB: hereafter ----------- NIV: in the future

John 13:19 ---------- NASB: from now on --------- NIV: from now on

John 14:7 ----------- NASB: from now on --------- NIV: from now on

Revelation 14:13 ---- NASB: from now on --------- NIV: from now on

In Synopsis of the Four Gospels: Greek-English Edition of the Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum (tenth edition), edited by Kurt Aland, Matthew 26:64 and Luke 22:69 are listed in parallel passages.

Luke 22:69 is Luke's account of the same statement made by Jesus on the same occasion as the one reported in Matthew 26:64. The only significant difference in the Greek text between the two parallel accounts is that Luke 22:69 does not include the allusion to Daniel 7:13 which is in Matthew 26:64. What is remarkable about a comparison of the two verses is the arbitrary difference in the predicted time of fulfillment between Luke 22:69 and Matthew 26:64, not in the meaning of the Greek text but in the rendering of the Greek text in the NASB and in the NIV. Because the same statement on the same occasion is presented in these two scripture verses, one would expect the same sense to be rendered in both verses.

Notice how both the NASB and the NIV render a reference to time in Matthew 26:64 (NASB: "hereafter"; NIV: "in the future") which is quite different from the reference to time which they render in Luke 22:69 – But from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God (NASB). But from now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God (NIV).

Why the difference in the rendering of Matthew 26:64 and Luke 22:69 (which refer to the same saying of Jesus, except for the omission of the allusion to Daniel 7:13 in Luke 22:69)? Reason: Rendering in a clear way the true sense of ap’ arti in Matthew 26:64 (as the NJB does in the quote in the heading above) would represent Jesus as saying that Daniel 7:13 would be fulfilled in the immediate future. That the translators could not accept as being true, because that contradicts the premillennial presupposition, which is, that Daniel 7:13 refers to a yet future (as of the dawning of the 21st century AD) return of Christ to earth to "set up the consummated kingdom" after (yet in our future) "receiving the kingdom at the consummation, when his reign or kingdom becomes direct, immediate, uncontested and universal." The words in quotes are those of D.A. Carson in The Expositor's Bible Commentary (1984), volume 8, page 506. Carson's comments are representative of the premillennial mindset, which he shares with the translators of the NASB and the NIV. However much it may agree with premillennial presuppositions, Carson's comment regarding the sense of ap’ arti in Matthew 26:64 is exegetically questionable.

How can the sense of ap’ arti in Matthew 26:64 be ascertained? One way is to consider the force of the synonymous phrase in the parallel passage of Luke 22:69 – But from now on (apo tou nun) the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God. According to C.C. Torrey, late Professor of Semitic Languages at Yale University, in Documents of the Primitive Church (1941), pages 84-85, "The ap’ arti of Matt. renders the same word that in Luke is rendered by apo tou nun, namely the Aramaic mk(N, 'straightway', 'very soon', 'in the immediate future'."

The sense of the Aramaic word as defined by Torrey and rendered by both ap’ arti and apo tou nun is the sense meant by Jesus. In Matthew 26:64 ap’ arti = apo (= the word rendered from in the phrase from now on in Luke 22:69 et. al.) with the o elided before an initial vowel in the following word, + arti; and arti is a synonym for nun (pronunciation = "noon") = now.

G. Abbott-Smith's Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament gives this definition for arti: "adv. of coincidence, denoting strictly present time, as contrasted with past or future, just, just now, this moment."

To understand the sense of ap’ arti in Matthew 26:64, look at the above list of NASB renderings in the 5 verses other than Matthew 26:64 in which ap’ arti occurs, and the NASB rendering of the synonymous apo tou nun in Luke 22:69. In every verse (except the NIV "again" in Matthew 23:39, which won't work in Matthew 26:64) you see the rendering from now on. To render the phrase ap’ arti in any less clear way in Matthew 26:64 is to purposely blur and obscure the import of the text, in the interest of faithfulness to a presupposition rather than to the explicit sense of the scripture.

Here are two comments happily devoid of any obfuscation of the sense of ap’ arti in Matthew 26:64:

"Coming on the clouds of heaven (together with the phrase 'the Son of man') is a clear allusion to Daniel 7:13, already similarly alluded to in 24:3...... We have seen that its natural application in terms of its Old Testament source is the vindication and enthronement of the Son of Man in heaven, not to a descent to earth. It is therefore in this verse a parallel expression to 'seated at the right hand of Power'; the two phrases refer to the same exalted state, not to two successive situations or events. In this verse the appropriateness of this interpretation is underlined by the fact that this is to be true 'from now on' (hereafter is a quite misleading rendering of the more specific phrase ap’ arti, which, as in 23:39 and 26:29, denotes a new period beginning from now. Indeed it is something which Jesus' inquisitors themselves will see (an echo of Zc. 12:10, as in 24:30?), for it will quickly become apparent in the events of even the next few weeks (not to mention the subsequent growth of the church) that the 'blasphemer' they thought they had disposed of is in fact now in the position of supreme authority." - R. T. France, Matthew (TNTC), page 381.

"from now on [ap’ arti -JR] ... The Greek is quite emphatic. Those listening to Jesus are asked to see in the person surrounded by enemies The-Man-in-glory, the cloud rider of Dan. 7:13ff. (cf. also Ps. cx 1). In a very real sense this is the climax of all that Matthew's tradition has so carefully preserved for us in the sayings about the Man. Though Jesus does not say, "You will see me," the identification is plain enough to his hearers." - William F. Albright and C. S. Mann, The Anchor Bible: Matthew, page 333.

Several years after writing the above, I was pleasantly surprised to find that in the English Standard Version, published in 2001, there is this rendering of ap’ arti (“surprised”, because the ESV is an update of the RSV, in which the rendering is “hereafter”):

Matthew 26

64 Jesus said to him, "You have said so. But I tell you, from now on [ap’ arti -JR] you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven." (ESV)

The New Revised Standard Version had gotten it right in 1989:

64 Jesus said to him, "You have said so. But I tell you, from now on [ap’ arti -JR] you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven." (NRSV)

Likewise the Revised English Bible (1989):

64 Jesus replied, 'The words are yours. But I tell you this: from now on [ap’ arti -JR] you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Almighty and coming on the clouds of heaven.' (REB)

The New Jerusalem Bible (quoted at the beginning of this post) had it right in 1984:

64 Jesus answered him, 'It is you who say it. But, I tell you that from this time onward [ap’ arti -JR] you will see the Son of man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.' (NJB)

The Bible in Today's English Version was published in 1966:

64 Jesus answered him, "So you say. But I tell all of you: from this time on [ap’ arti -JR] you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Almighty and coming on the clouds of heaven!" (TEV)

[dizzle]

Thank you John!!!!

One thing I am fond of pointing out on this passage in debate is something I think is often overlooked is that Jesus equates His "coming" with His "sitting" very dramatically. The High Priest would see Him "coming" AND "sitting" concurrently. Obviously that cannot be the kind of "coming" most see in that passage.

[dizzle]

Thank you John!!!!

One thing I am fond of pointing out on this passage in debate is something I think is often overlooked is that Jesus equates His "coming" with His "sitting" very dramatically. The High Priest would see Him "coming" AND "sitting" concurrently. Obviously that cannot be the kind of "coming" most see in that passage.

I have had a request to clarify... hmm I am not sure how to. The main point is that His Coming is equivalent to His Sitting thus cannot be referring to His bodily return to the earth, since He is "sitting" in Heaven, thus His "coming" is referring to the coming obviously in Daniel 7. Preterism makes the Bible make sooo much sense.

[John Reece]

I have had a request to clarify... hmm I am not sure how to. The main point is that His Coming is equivalent to His Sitting thus cannot be referring to His bodily return to the earth, since He is "sitting" in Heaven, thus His "coming" is referring to the coming obviously in Daniel 7. Preterism makes the Bible make sooo much sense.

Yes :yes:

:thumb:

Thanks, Dee Dee.