Christ's coming (erchomai)--what event?

by M.J. 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  M.J.

  The WTS often quotes Matt 24:44:

  "On this account YOU too prove yourselves ready, because at an hour that YOU do not think to be it, the Son of man is coming."

  Of course the application here is that Christ is coming to bring judgment on the earth and end the current "system of things".

  For example:

  *** w05 1/15 p. 20 par. 19 Foregleams of God’s Kingdom Become a Reality ***

  Do you want to be among those who will stand in awe of the victorious Son of God? Then continue to nourish your faith and to ‘prove yourself ready, because at an hour that you do not think to be it, the Son of man is coming.’—Matthew 24:43, 44.

  But looking at the context of the verse, what event is signified by Jesus' reference to his coming (greek: erchomai)?

  Check it out in context (Matt 24:44-51):

  Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh (erchomai).

  Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season? Blessed [is] that servant, whom his lord when he cometh (erchomai) shall find so doing. Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods. But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming (erchomai); And shall begin to smite [his] fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken; The lord of that servant shall come (heko)in a day when he looketh not for [him], and in an hour that he is not aware of, And shall cut him asunder, and appoint [him] his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

  Interestingly, in the portion of this passage that describes the "faithful servant", the WTS says that THIS time, Christ refers to "coming", not in the sense of returning to destroy the current system, but to describe the onset of his invisible "presence" in 1914, which, interestingly, is only cryptically perceptible to the "faithful servant" and imperceptible to the unfaithful servant.

  Isn't this a confusing way for Christ to speak to his disciples? In fact, in reading Matt 24 with the WTS assumptions in place, one must switch back and forth in such a manner between these two different definitions of Christ's "coming".

  In typical fashion, the WTS reduces scripture to a lot of disconnected verses with disconnected meanings.

  A straight reading of the passage could be paraphrased this way:

  "Look, disciples. I'm coming back, but I won't say exactly when, so be ready at all times. So you gotta ask yourselves one thing. Are you going to be like that faithful servant who takes care of the master's household as if the master could come back at any minute, or are you going to be like that slacker servant who figures he's got enough time before the master returns to throw a big kegger, eat up all the food, and give the other servants a few good beatings? You can count on his master coming back when he least expects it to catch him in the act. When that happens, it ain't gonna be pretty. Now you tell me, which one of these guys is the master gonna reward?"
• 

  carla

  I agree with you MJ. Let's see what our resident scholars have to say.
• 

  lovelylil

  The coming you mention is when Christ comes to gather his church (believers in him) and give them their rewards for faithfulness. When he comes he also sits on the throne (on earth) with his co-hiers to judge the twelve tribes of Isreal first, then the rest of mankind. This judgeing does not include wiping out 99.9% of mankind. The Bible teaches no such thing, it actually teaches the opposite and that is during Christ's reign on earth, whole nations will repent, Israel first, the all others and put faith in him(Christ). See Jeremiah 33, Isaiah 2:2-4, Isaiah 11, Zephaniah 3:20, Zacheriah 10:6. These are but a few of the restoration promises.

  In the NT - speaks of Israel restored first then all things; Acts 1:6, 15,16, 3:21.

  Most churches teach hellfire or destruction of all non Christians because they 1. Want to control the masses of people and use fear to do it. 2. misunderstand that "destruction" actually means "judgement", and 3. refuse to look at the OT to understand the NT thinking it applies only to the Jewish nation. The inspired scriptures are the Bible prophecies only and those are ALL in the OT. You must understand the OT to understand the NT.

  Seperating of sheep and goats is an illustration showing what will be the final state of those who obey or disobey Christ, after the see for themselves that it is he who came to restore all things. And the full fulfillment is not in one literal day but over time. The nations of unbelievers will be drawn to Jesus first. This illustration does not apply to believers in him but the unbelievers whom Jesus gives the chance to accept him as king. If they do, they are likened to sheep (meaning meek and willing to accept him) if not, they are goats (stubborn, refuse to accepts God's arrangement) only the goats will be cut off completely from the earth. And in relative number to those who accept Christ, these will probably be few. NO ONE is cut off upon Jesus arrival! This would be cruel as most of mankind has not had their hearts open to accept Christ yet, or been given adequate witness about him, or even live in countries where they can accept him fully due to many other issues that plague them; violence, poverty, disease, etc. The WT got one part right now which is that this seperating is done by Christ and the Angels when he sits on his throne. This has nothing to do with the gathering of believers which is the current time. (gospel age). Right now believers are to give a "witness" about Christ only - not proclaim a judgement on anyone!

  Matthew 24:14 This good News of the kingdom will be preached thru all the earth, for a WITNESS to all the nations, and then the end (of the gospel age, not world) will come".

  What good news is it if you preach destruction of 99.9% of mankind? Peace, Lilly
• 

  moggy lover

  Great post, MJ. It is always a joy when one sees someone add 2+2 from Bible facts and makes 4 not 3, or 5, as does the leadership of the WTS. To them Matt 24 is a nightmare trying to interpret, and I defy any average WT follower from telling us, without the use of WT literature, what any particular verse means.

  Because there are, according to the WT leadership, parts of Matt 24 that have only one application, in the 1stC AD, [[vs 20] parts have a dual application both in the 1CAD and now, [vs 9-14] some have only one application, in the future [25:32-46, yes I know that this chap 25, but it is still part of the same conversation] etc etc.

  To even a casual Bible student, the two words of prophetic significane used by Jesus,Parousia and Erchomai are used interchangeably, and though there is a subtle difference of meaning between the two, they both mean COMING.[ It must be remembered that this based on seeing Matt 24 as prophetic. Many do not, for legitimate reasons, feeling the the meaning of Matt 24 was exhaused in the 1st c AD] The subtlety lies in that, whereas erchomai simply means coming, per se, Parousia means coming, but refers particularly to a person of high rank, like a king, or emperor. Prof Adolph Deismann, in his book "Light from the Ancient East" goes to great lengths, using manuscript evidence going back to Ptolemaic times, to prove this. This no doubt was the reason for the WTS and its somewhat disdainful, and dismissive remark about him in the KIT [1st ed] pg 1161.

  The WT leadership insists on seeing the two words as seperate units. The first, parousia, whenever it is commented on is always prefaced with the WT statement, Christ's"invisible presence". In the second edition of KIT, where the Deismann remark is dropped, the writers use several scriptures to show that parousia = presence, without actually telling us what kind of presence the NT is talking about. For instance one scripture cited is that of 2 Cor 10:10 discussing Paul's own "parousia" [Pg 1147 KIT B] It would take a truly distorted sense of "reasonig" to make this mean Paul's invisible presence, when in fact he was referring to his being beside the Corinthians, in the flesh. Making reference to an "invisible presence" is as absurd as referring to a "visible absence" In fact in Phil 2:12, where parousia is contrasted wih "Apousia" - absence, one might ask the WTS: If Paul was "invisible" when he was present, and also invisible in his absence, then what the hell is the contrast? The words would mean the same thing!!

  In emphasizing that parousia means presence, and not coming, the WT leadership have deliberately obscured the fact that the word means a literal, physical, bodily presence. The force of parousia is that whereas it can mean a physical presence, when referring to a king or emperor it means a bodily coming as well.

  If viewed prophetically, it is obvious that Matt 24, 25 is referring to something major and catastrophic in the future. As it is a future event, then the parousia/erchomai of Jesus is also future. as is the the existence of the "faithful and wise slave" At that time, if it comes tomorrow, we hope that we shall be counted among the faithful and wise ones mentioned in vs 44. Jesus is coming again, according to Matt 24, whether He is coming to "bring an end to this system of things" or whether He is "going to vindicate the tri-syllabic word Je-ho-vah" is the commentary of the WTS to divert attention from the Person of Christ. To a Christian, Christ is coming period. Literally. Physically. Visibly.

  We are asked to believe it. Not to make a doctrine out of it.

  Cheers. Keep up with your posts.
• 

  Leolaia

  M.J. is exactly right....it is the same eschatological event that is referred to for both. Also note that the point of the parable, that "the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of," echoes the statement in v. 36 (which the Society applies to Armageddon), the statement in v. 39 about the people who lived in the days of Noah (which the Society likens to Armageddon), the parable about the thief in v. 43-44 (which the Society likens to Armageddon), the parable about the bridegroom and the ten virgins in 25:5 (who fall asleep prior to the bridegroom's coming, which the Society applies to Armageddon), and the parable of the talents in 25:19 (which has the master gone for a "long while" as well). Note also that the separating of the sheep and goats in 25:31-46 occurs in the same eschatological event as 24:30-31, "when the Son of Man comes in glory with his angels". The Society used to claim that this separating work began when the "presence" started in 1914, for the parable of the talents that immediately precedes it is clearly a parallel to the parable of the faithful and wise servant. In 1995, the Society realized finally that the separating of the sheep and goats occurs in the same event as 24:30-44, and yet they still fail to realize that the other two parables (the parable of the faithful and wise servant and the parable of the talents) refer to the same thing, along with the parables of the thief, the foolish virgins, and the description of the days of Noah. Why? Obviously because their doctrinal claim to authority as "the faithful slave" is at stake. If the master hasn't yet come to pronounce his followers as either the "faithful" or "wicked" slave, then what does it mean for some of his followers to presumptuously claim the title for themselves?
• 

  lovelylil

  M.J. and Leolaia,

  That is a good point that the rewarding of the faithful slave and seperating takes place in the same time period. Probably not a literal day, but a long period of time.

  My post was merely to show there is NO mass destruction. For Jesus is not coming to destroy but to reward the saints then restore all things to himself. Which includes the converting of all nations and peoples. Even if some believer that Christ's followers are rewarded and then the next event (during the same period) is the seperating of the sheep and the goats, it does not change the fact that Jesus does not come to destroy most of mankind.

  The WT and BS teach there are two comings. but I see what you are both saying, there is only one.

  Good thread, Lilly
• 

  lovelylil

  I should edit my last post to read.

  The rewarding of the church and the seperating of the sheep and the goats are two seperate events that happen within the same time period. Lilly
• 

  Narkissos

  Lovelylil,

  The Russellite (and perhaps earlier?) idea of the "day of judgement" as a long period involving teaching and conversion of non-believers (living or dead) is certainly attractive in opposition to classical church doctrine, but I fail to see any support for it in the NT.

  In the judgement scene of Matthew 25, sheep and goats are separated on the basis of what they did, or did not, without a knowledge of Christ and his identification with 'the least of his brothers'. Their absence of knowledge is explicitly disqualified as an excuse for the "goats". The conclusion of the Lazarus parable in Luke 16 points to the same direction: knowledge doesn't change anything.

  In Revelation 20, the resurrection of the dead occurs after the millenium, and their judgement is made on the basis of what they have done -- not what they will do.

  Back to the topic: the semantic distinctions which the WT uses to make, not only between different Greek words like erkhomai and parousia, but also between different forms of the same Greek verb erkhomai, are already untenable within the Greek text as has been pointed out; but they are all the more ludicrous as the WT assumes Jesus actually said it in Aramaic, which lacks such formal distinctions.
• 

  lovelylil

  thanks Narkissos,

  There are two widely interpretations that most people have regarding Matthew 25 and the judgement;

  The first is that the judgement occurs at the beginning of the millennial kingdom, with the purpose of determing who will be allowed to enter the kingdom. The basis of judgement will be what treatment is given to the Jewish people during the preceding great tribulation period.

  The second is that this judgement occurs at the end of the millennial age and determines who will be allowed to enter the eternal kingdom of the saved. The basis of judgement will be on whether love is shown to God's people.

  I think Russell was correct in choosing the second option for the judgement. The reason being that the judgement of the entire earth could not possibly take place in a short time, such as an actual day. This must be a longer period of time. Also if their is a judgement, there is a trial of sorts. What will happen if the people repent? If they repent and choose Christ as their king, they can remain in the kingdom. If not, they will eventually be cut off forever. The prophecies in the OT clearly show a mass conversion of many nations. At least that is how I am interpreting it. I am not being dogmatic at all. I could be wrong. But I feel that a loving God and King would make ample opportunity for all of mankind to repent and change their ways. How many right now are truly accepting Christ? Not many. I cannot see that changing without a divine intervention. Especially when there are many external factors that need to be removed for people to accept christ during this time period.

  Again, this is how I see it. I don't think it really matters which judgement we think is correct, we will have to wait and see. Lilly
• 

  Narkissos

  Lovelylil,

  Hope you don't mind my picking... I think it's worth discussing a bit because it is the comparatively "bright side" of the WT teaching, which may stick a long time in xJW minds...

  Leaving aside that there is no millenium in Matthew...

  this judgement occurs at the end of the millennial age and determines who will be allowed to enter the eternal kingdom of the saved. The basis of judgement will be on whether love is shown to God's people.

  Do you think "God's people" will suffer from hunger or thirst, be sick or imprisoned during the millenium? Because Matthew 25 is about helping people in those conditions.

  I think Russell was correct in choosing the second option for the judgement. The reason being that the judgement of the entire earth could not possibly take place in a short time, such as an actual day. This must be a longer period of time.

  Seriously, why? If God deals with every living being at every instant and he does the judgement (not to mention the angels), any notion of "reasonable time" is moot imo. Or, if you prefer, it may take just the "time" to read Matthew 25 -- notice the text uses group talk. You don't have to imagine billions of people in line waiting for an individual verdict, in turn: that would make a very boring millenium with hundreds of successive cases every day.

  Also if their is a judgement, there is a trial of sorts. What will happen if the people repent? If they repent and choose Christ as their king, they can remain in the kingdom. If not, they will eventually be cut off forever.

  This (the Russellite) view actually implies that there is no judgement of what people are doing now, in their state of relative ignorance. Which is the opposite of what the text plainly says. In the parable the "goats" do acknowledge Christ as the King and are ready to serve him. But they are doomed for what they have not done to his brothers when they didn't know they were his brothers.

  The prophecies in the OT clearly show a mass conversion of many nations. At least that is how I am interpreting it. I am not being dogmatic at all.

  Don't forget such "prophecies" are often applied to the present (or past) conversion of Gentiles to Christ in the N.T. (e.g. Acts 15:14-17).

  I don't have anything against this part of Russellism per se. It may indeed provide a more acceptable version of "judgement". What I can't buy for one minute is that it can be successfully argued from Scripture.