Some will not see death until the Kingdom comes. When is this?

[asterisktom]

I though this would be a good topic for its own thread, not buried in another one: What about Christ's prophecy to His disciple before the Transfiguration? He said that some here would not see death until they see the Kingdom coming in power, Christ coming into His kingdom? When did this happen?

"And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power." Mark 9:1

I wrote this earlier:
But perhaps the biggest factor that turned me away from this theology was that it just had no answer for Christ's many promises to come to His own "soon", or "quickly". And that He told them at the time of the Transfiguration that some of them would still be alive when He came into His kingdom.

 

[swaimj]

The disciples who saw Jesus in his kingdom glory prior to their deaths were Peter, James, and John when they saw Jesus in His glory on the mount of transfiguration.

Peter's commentary on this event in II Peter 1:16 - 18 supports this view.

 

[SolaSaint]

The disciples who saw Jesus in his kingdom glory prior to their deaths were Peter, James, and John when they saw Jesus in His glory on the mount of transfiguration.

Peter's commentary on this event in II Peter 1:16 - 18 supports this view.

Yes this is the way I see it also. I don't think it could be any other way. Do full preterists believe that this means Jesus has already returned?

 

[MovieProducer]

Michael Pearl's book "Eight Kingdoms" has a fascinating discussion about this. I'm not sure I understand it all, but his essential point is that you have to grasp the difference between the "kingdom of God" and the "kingdom of heaven" to know this. http://shop.nogreaterjoy.org/product_info.php/products_id/167

 

[Allan]

The disciples who saw Jesus in his kingdom glory prior to their deaths were Peter, James, and John when they saw Jesus in His glory on the mount of transfiguration.

Peter's commentary on this event in II Peter 1:16 - 18 supports this view.

I concur with respect to the passage and Peters writing (which you give) on this re-enforce it.

 

[asterisktom]

The disciples who saw Jesus in his kingdom glory prior to their deaths were Peter, James, and John when they saw Jesus in His glory on the mount of transfiguration.

Peter's commentary on this event in II Peter 1:16 - 18 supports this view.

I just have time for a short comment before work: Does it not strike you as odd phrasing then? To say that some will still be alive - a few days later? Prophesying something like that seems to be akin to shooting fish in a barrel.

More later.

Thanks for tackling the question, though, you and the others who responded.

 

[swaimj]

Well, I suppose Jesus could have said, "Tomorrow, Peter, James, and John will get to see me in my kingdom glory when we go up to the top of the mountain". But, of course, after the three DID see Jesus in His glory, Jesus told them not to tell anyone about the experience. Given that later instruction, it is understandable that he was somewhat cryptic in His comment beforehand.

The advantage of my position (and several others who have voiced agreement) is that it is the most natural answer in the context and Peter's statement corroborates the conclusion quite well. Any other answer, it seems to me, it going to be convoluted. Whether we are trying to interpret scripture, do philosophy, or figure out why the car won't start, it's always best to start with the simple and obvious answers and go onto more complicated answers if the simple solutions don't work. In this case, context and corroborating material answer the question. I think when most people consider this, they will say "mystery solved".

 

[Crabtownboy]

I find the explanations here interesting. However, it seems to me that to accept any of them is to reject a literal interpretation of this scripture. Enlighten me. [not arguing, looking for understanding.]

 

[swaimj]

Crabtownboy, I consider my take on this to be according to a literal interpretation. Not sure why you perceive it to fail.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Crabtownboy, I consider my take on this to be according to a literal interpretation. Not sure why you perceive it to fail.

I am not sure I agree nor disagree. It is a strange way of wording, especially considering the next verses.

I did fine that some believe this verse actually belongs as the last verse of chapter 8.

Verse 1. There be some] This verse properly belongs to the preceding chapter, and to the preceding discourse. It is in this connection in Matt. xvi. 27, 28. See the notes there.
http://www.godrules.net/library/clarke/clarkemar9.htm

Let me do some more research. Remember in the original writing's there were no verses or chapters. These were added later.

The present New Testament verses were introduced by Robert Stephens first in his Greco-Latin Testament published in 1551 A.D., and then later Stephens published the Latin Vulgate of 1555, the first whole Bible divided into the present verses. Legend has it that Robert Stephens numbered the verses of the Bible while on horseback on a trip. His son testifies that his father did indeed number the verses of the Bible while on a trip from Paris to Lyons, but that the work was done while resting at the inns along the road. http://www.scripturessay.com/article.php?cat=&id=383

I do not see Stephens divisions as inerrant. I think it is possible he made some mistakes and this may be one.

 

[swaimj]

I did fine that some believe this verse actually belongs as the last verse of chapter 8.

I think you are right and that the chapter division is a little unfortunate. Certainly, in the last verse of the previous chapter, the text speaks of the coming kingdom. However, having spoken of the kingdom and that some would see it, it seems that the when the text points out that 6 days later the transfiguration occurs, this is pointing out that what has just been mentioned has now been fulfilled.

 

[Grasshopper]

Mat 16:27 For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward each one according to his works.
Mat 16:28 Truly I say to you, There are some standing here who shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.

Notice how everyone ignores the previous verse that helps give us some context. Was verse 27 also fulfilled at the Transfiguration? Are we to separate verse 27 from 28? Is verse 27 to be fulfilled thousands of years AFTER verse 28?

Gill gets it, ( sort of)

"though it seems chiefly to have regard to his coming, to show his regal power and authority in the destruction of the Jews; when those his enemies that would not he should reign over them, were ordered to be brought and slain before him; and this the Apostle John, for one, lived to be a witness of."

An AD70 fulfillment fits perfectly. If this event occcured 40 years after its prediction then the use of "some standing here" makes perfect sense. If it occured 6 days later it makes absolutely no sense in that all would still be alive.

The Transfiguration is a picture of the passing of the Old Covenant (Law/Moses and Prophets/Elijah) and the coming of the New Covenant/Jesus. Christ came in judgement in AD70 fulfilling this prophecy.

John Lightfoot:

Mat 24:34 -
Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
[This generation shall not pass, etc.] hence it appears plain enough, that the foregoing verses are not to be understood of the last judgment, but, as we said, of the destruction of Jerusalem. There were some among the disciples (particularly John), who lived to see these things come to pass. With Mat_16:28; compare Joh_21:22. And there were some Rabbins alive at the time when Christ spoke these things, that lived till the city was destroyed, viz. Rabban Simeon, who perished with the city, R. Jochanan Ben Zaccai, who outlived it, R. Zadoch, R. Ismael, and others.

 

[asterisktom]

Mat 16:27 For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward each one according to his works.
Mat 16:28 Truly I say to you, There are some standing here who shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.

Notice how everyone ignores the previous verse that helps give us some context. Was verse 27 also fulfilled at the Transfiguration? Are we to separate verse 27 from 28? Is verse 27 to be fulfilled thousands of years AFTER verse 28?

Gill gets it, ( sort of)

"though it seems chiefly to have regard to his coming, to show his regal power and authority in the destruction of the Jews; when those his enemies that would not he should reign over them, were ordered to be brought and slain before him; and this the Apostle John, for one, lived to be a witness of."

An AD70 fulfillment fits perfectly. If this event occcured 40 years after its prediction then the use of "some standing here" makes perfect sense. If it occured 6 days later it makes absolutely no sense in that all would still be alive.

The Transfiguration is a picture of the passing of the Old Covenant (Law/Moses and Prophets/Elijah) and the coming of the New Covenant/Jesus. Christ came in judgement in AD70 fulfilling this prophecy.

John Lightfoot:

Mat 24:34 -
Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
[This generation shall not pass, etc.] hence it appears plain enough, that the foregoing verses are not to be understood of the last judgment, but, as we said, of the destruction of Jerusalem. There were some among the disciples (particularly John), who lived to see these things come to pass. With Mat_16:28; compare Joh_21:22. And there were some Rabbins alive at the time when Christ spoke these things, that lived till the city was destroyed, viz. Rabban Simeon, who perished with the city, R. Jochanan Ben Zaccai, who outlived it, R. Zadoch, R. Ismael, and others.

I think this is the right answer.

Doorbell. Grrr

 

[swaimj]

If this event occcured 40 years after its prediction then the use of "some standing here" makes perfect sense. If it occured 6 days later it makes absolutely no sense in that all would still be alive.

It's not a question of who is alive, it is a matter of who sees. Only some see. In the immediate context, the ones who see Jesus in His glory are the three disciples.

Here are the key questions to answer:

Was Jesus' Kingdom glory revealed on the mount of transfiguration?

Did everyone who was listening to Jesus see that glory?

The answers are "yes" and "no". Therefore the revelation on the mount of transfiguration perfectly fulfills the words Jesus spoke. Therefore, this is the proper interpretation.

 

[OldRegular]

Michael Pearl's book "Eight Kingdoms" has a fascinating discussion about this. I'm not sure I understand it all, but his essential point is that you have to grasp the difference between the "kingdom of God" and the "kingdom of heaven" to know this. http://shop.nogreaterjoy.org/product_info.php/products_id/167

Not to derail this thread but a careful examination of Scripture will show there is no difference between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven!

 

[OldRegular]

Mat 16:27 For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward each one according to his works.
Mat 16:28 Truly I say to you, There are some standing here who shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.

Notice how everyone ignores the previous verse that helps give us some context. Was verse 27 also fulfilled at the Transfiguration? Are we to separate verse 27 from 28? Is verse 27 to be fulfilled thousands of years AFTER verse 28?

Gill gets it, ( sort of)

"though it seems chiefly to have regard to his coming, to show his regal power and authority in the destruction of the Jews; when those his enemies that would not he should reign over them, were ordered to be brought and slain before him; and this the Apostle John, for one, lived to be a witness of."

An AD70 fulfillment fits perfectly. If this event occcured 40 years after its prediction then the use of "some standing here" makes perfect sense. If it occured 6 days later it makes absolutely no sense in that all would still be alive.

The Transfiguration is a picture of the passing of the Old Covenant (Law/Moses and Prophets/Elijah) and the coming of the New Covenant/Jesus. Christ came in judgement in AD70 fulfilling this prophecy.

John Lightfoot:

Mat 24:34 -
Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
[This generation shall not pass, etc.] hence it appears plain enough, that the foregoing verses are not to be understood of the last judgment, but, as we said, of the destruction of Jerusalem. There were some among the disciples (particularly John), who lived to see these things come to pass. With Mat_16:28; compare Joh_21:22. And there were some Rabbins alive at the time when Christ spoke these things, that lived till the city was destroyed, viz. Rabban Simeon, who perished with the city, R. Jochanan Ben Zaccai, who outlived it, R. Zadoch, R. Ismael, and others.

Did the Son of Man come in the Glory of the Father in 70AD?

 

[Winman]

An AD70 fulfillment fits perfectly. If this event occcured 40 years after its prediction then the use of "some standing here" makes perfect sense. If it occured 6 days later it makes absolutely no sense in that all would still be alive.

Nonsense. Only 3 disciples witnessed the transfiguration, that is why Jesus some "some standing here". He could not say "all", because not all of his disciples would witness it.

You are reading into it what you want it to say.

 

[Allan]

It's not a question of who is alive, it is a matter of who sees. Only some see. In the immediate context, the ones who see Jesus in His glory are the three disciples.

Exactly. Changing the wording can make the text say practically anything one likes. The text does not state 'alive' nor does the Greek word even stand for or allude to it meaning 'alive'.

 

[Allan]

Well, I suppose Jesus could have said, "Tomorrow, Peter, James, and John will get to see me in my kingdom glory when we go up to the top of the mountain". But, of course, after the three DID see Jesus in His glory, Jesus told them not to tell anyone about the experience. Given that later instruction, it is understandable that he was somewhat cryptic in His comment beforehand.

The advantage of my position (and several others who have voiced agreement) is that it is the most natural answer in the context and Peter's statement corroborates the conclusion quite well. Any other answer, it seems to me, it going to be convoluted. Whether we are trying to interpret scripture, do philosophy, or figure out why the car won't start, it's always best to start with the simple and obvious answers and go onto more complicated answers if the simple solutions don't work. In this case, context and corroborating material answer the question. I think when most people consider this, they will say "mystery solved".

Well put and well said.

 

[Allan]

Did the Son of Man come in the Glory of the Father in 70AD?

That was going to be my question :thumbs: