The "coming of the son of man" already took place?

[surrender1]

Why did Jesus tell his disciples they wouldn't finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes? (Mt. 10:23) Is it true they lived to see the coming of the son of man?

 

[surrender1]

Jesus also told his disciples that some of them would live to see the kingdom of God come with power. (Mark 9:1)

Since the "coming of the son of man" already took place according to these scriptures, the "coming of the son of man" event can't be the same thing as Jesus' physical "second coming" at the physical resurrection of all humans.

 

[tampasteve]

There is a pretty good article at the link below, but in short it says:

Another alternative is to take the promise literally and immediately and to interpret the phrase “before the Son of Man comes” as a reference to the fact that Jesus rejoined the disciples after their mission. This view may be supported by several facts. First, the phrase “before the Son of Man comes” is never used by Matthew to describe the Second Coming. Second, it fits with a literal understanding of the first part of the verse. The disciples went literally and immediately into “the cities of Israel” to preach, and Jesus literally and immediately rejoined them after their itinerant ministry. Third, there is no indication here or anywhere else that the disciples believed that Jesus was going to go to heaven while they were gone on their preaching tour. This certainly would have startled them (cf. John 14:1–5). Furthermore, He had already told them that He had to die and rise from the dead (John 2:19–22) before He could go to heaven and return.

Is there a Bible contradiction in Matthew 10:23?

Others say it refers to the Holy Spirit coming, being a part of the Trinity. There are other explanations, but in short there are a few things it could mean that make sense.

 

[Shempster]

This is a very disturbing verse. If you plainly read it, you should understand. I have heard explanations that say he came back spiritually and others just say they don't know. I'm in the I don't know camp.

Theres another one where it said that Yeshua did so many more things that if it were written down, all the books in the world could not report on it. That also ties in to the mystery verse you quoted.
Now as I understand it, they were talking about AFTER he rose from the dead and BEFORE his ascension.
Now that was what?, just over a month? How much could he have said and done in that time? Even if every event and word spoken were written down, certainly it would be like a couple of Brittanica sets.
Not only that, but we don't have any records of what he did and what he said other than the words in the gospels.

So, does this mean that he DID come back in some way we don't understand? 2,000 years would be enough time to claim that all the books could not hold it. Did he really mean that he did return in a sense because he lives in us?

 

[surrender1]

Are any of you familiar with the "coming of the son of man" imagery in Daniel 7? It gives this scene where one like the son of man was taken on the clouds of heaven to the "Ancient of Days" to receive a kingdom. This son of man figure symbolizes oppressed Israel and his coming on the clouds represents Israel's vindication over their oppressors. It has been suggested that Jesus was using this imagery and applying it to himself.

 

[surrender1]

There is a pretty good article at the link below, but in short it says:

Is there a Bible contradiction in Matthew 10:23?

Others say it refers to the Holy Spirit coming, being a part of the Trinity. There are other explanations, but in short there are a few things it could mean that make sense.

But how can the "rejoining the disciples" be seen as "seeing the kingdom of God come with power" (Mark 9:1; cf. Mt. 16:28)? Jesus puts the "coming of the son of man" event at the time the son of man "comes in the glory of his father with his angels" (Mt. 16:27) and it’s this event some of his disciples were to live to see (cf. Mt. 16:28).

 

[-57]

Jesus also told his disciples that some of them would live to see the kingdom of God come with power. (Mark 9:1)

I think that is answered in the very next verse.
1Then Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste deathuntil they see the kingdom of God arrive withpower.” 2After six days, Jesus took with Him Peter, James, and John, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. There He was transfigured before them.

Could not the transfiguration not be what is described? Did not some of the disciples witness the transfiguration?

 

[-57]

Why did Jesus tell his disciples they wouldn't finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes? (Mt. 10:23) Is it true they lived to see the coming of the son of man?

Doesn't this verse speak of the end time? Tribulation?
When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Just because we do not understand something doesn't mean there is a contradiction. FYI

 

[surrender1]

I think that is answered in the very next verse.
1Then Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste deathuntil they see the kingdom of God arrive withpower.” 2After six days, Jesus took with Him Peter, James, and John, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. There He was transfigured before them.

Could not the transfiguration not be what is described? Did not some of the disciples witness the transfiguration?

Some might die within six days? That doesn't sound right. And how was the transfiguration him coming "in the glory of his father with angels"? He also connects the coming of the son of man with repaying each man according to his deeds.

 

[surrender1]

Doesn't this verse speak of the end time? Tribulation?
When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next, for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

I think so.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Mt. 10:23

Verse 23

another = into the other: i.e. the next. Greek. allos (App-124.), but all texts read heteros. App-124.

not = by no means; in no wise. Greek. ou me.

gone over = completed, or finished [going over].

till. See the four: Matthew 10:23; Matthew 16:28; Matthew 28:39; Matthew 24:34.

the Son of man. See App-98.

be come = may have come. This is rendered hypothetical by the Particle an (which cannot be translated), because His coming depended on the repentance of Israel (Acts 3:19-26). It would then have been (and will now yet be) the judicial coming of "the Son of Man". Compare Acts 17:31.

Matthew 10 Commentary - E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes

 

[-57]

Some might die within six days? That doesn't sound right. And how was the transfiguration him coming "in the glory of his father with angels"? He also connects the coming of the son of man with repaying each man according to his deeds.

Were you there to say some people who heard Jesus that day could not have died within six days?

 

[-57]

Just because we do not understand something doesn't mean there is a contradiction. FYI

I would say, when understood correctly the apparent contradiction goes away.

 

[Halbhh]

Jesus also told his disciples that some of them would live to see the kingdom of God come with power. (Mark 9:1)

Since the "coming of the son of man" already took place according to these scriptures, the "coming of the son of man" event can't be the same thing as Jesus' physical "second coming" at the physical resurrection of all humans.

Well, when Christ was resurrected(!)....and visited them, that was indeed both the Kingdom present, and with power....

So, when they saw Him, suddenly standing among them in the locked room, the Kingdom was there, with them, in power. After the crucifixion.

From a situation of death on the cross -- to full resurrected power.

When He ascended, they saw the Kingdom with power also I think.

 

[-57]

Well, when Christ was resurrected(!)....and visited them, that was indeed both the Kingdom present, and with power....

So, when they saw Him, suddenly standing among them in the locked room, the Kingdom was there, with them, in power. After the crucifixion.

The interesting thing is, there is a number of ways this issue can be addressed...that to say it presents a problem is absurd.
The question becomes...which is the best answer.

 

[1213]

Why did Jesus tell his disciples they wouldn't finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes? (Mt. 10:23) Is it true they lived to see the coming of the son of man?

Perhaps that has been commonly misunderstood. Jesus was raised from death after 3 days. Could it be that it means the moment when Son of Man comes?

 

[surrender1]

Were you there to say some people who heard Jesus that day could not have died within six days?

It doesn't sound right at all. When someone says they think they'll live to see this or that, they're not talking about a week later.
I noticed you ignored, "And how was the transfiguration him coming "in the glory of his father with angels"? He also connects the coming of the son of man with repaying each man according to his deeds."

 

[1213]

Jesus also told his disciples that some of them would live to see the kingdom of God come with power. (Mark 9:1)

Mark 9:1 came true after six days, as the following scripture shows:

After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John, and brought them up onto a high mountain privately by themselves, and he was changed into another form in front of them. His clothing became glistening, exceedingly white, like snow, such as no launderer on earth can whiten them. Elijah and Moses appeared to them, and they were talking with Jesus.
Mark. 9:2-4

 

[surrender1]

I would say, when understood correctly the apparent contradiction goes away.

There is no contradiction. Jesus said they'd see the coming of the son of man and so I'm sure they did.