The Time is Near (Part 2): Eschatological Imminence in the New Testament
In Part 1 of this four-part series, I outlined two problems that come from delaying coming of Christ. First, if Christ promised a near return and he did not return soon, then it gives skeptics the ability to question the veracity of the Bible. Second, if Christ’s promise of a near return are extended to an event in the distant future, then they are joined to a number of events that must happen before he can return. And when that happens, the ostensible imminence is actually delayed by world events, such that the imminent return is not as imminent as some would conceive.
In response, I will begin to outline the doctrine of the Lord’s imminent return, based upon a reading of the New Testament that understands Christ’s “coming” in the near future as an event that took place in the first century. To be clear, I am not arguing that Christ’s Second Coming came in the first century. Instead, I am arguing that Christ came in judgment upon Jerusalem, as he always promised.
In this way, Christ’s words were always true. Yet, many are the interpreters who misunderstood his words and thus missed how his first century prophesies were fulfilled, and how this fulfillment served as a witness to the world that judgment will eventually come upon all nations, so therefore, repent and believe the gospel.
In this reading of the New Testament eschatology, I am affirming Christ’s Second Coming, often referred to as his Parousia, at the end of time. But I am also affirming the many ways the risen and exalted Christ has come in judgment (cf. Rev. 2:5, 16, 25; 3:20)—both in the first century and every century since. Still, to prove that point, we need to evaluate what Jesus and his Apostles said about his parousia or “coming.” And so in what follows, I want to look at the word parousia to show why its common use as a technical term for Christ’s final coming (Parousia) at the end of the age does not match its biblical use (parousia).
To put it simply, I will show in what follows why Parousia the theological term and parousia the biblical word are not exactly the same.
Parousia in Matthew 24
The word parousia is first used in Matthew 24:3, when the disciples ask Jesus a series of three questions: “Tell us, [1] when will these things happen? And [2] what is the sign of your coming and [3] of the end of the age?” As it is used by these disciples they ask two questions related to Christ’s “coming”—one relates to the sign of his coming and the other relates to the coming of the end of the age.
Notably, Matthew 24 is the only place in the Gospels we find this word—once in the question (v. 3) and three times in Jesus’s answer (vv. 27, 37, 39). First, he describes his coming like “lightning” that “comes from the east and flashes as far as the west.” Next, he compares his coming to the “days of Noah” (Matt. 24:37). And finally, he describes the manner of his coming as the flood. Speaking of those in Noah’s day, “They didn’t know until the flood came and swept them all away. This is the way the coming of the Son of Man will be” (Matt. 24:39).
Remarkably, the other Gospels do not employ parousia, and in the other two places where the Olivet Discourse is found (Mark 13 and Luke 21), Peter, James, John, and Andrew (listed in Mark’s Gospel) do not ask about Jesus’s coming. Instead, they simply ask “when will these things be.” In context, the “these things” relates to the destruction of the temple.
From this use in the Gospels, it seems that parousia is neither a common word (as it is only used four times), nor a technical one. A “technical” term is one that has a fixed meaning wherever it is used. For instance, when Paul uses the word mysterion (“mystery”), it has a fixed meaning: something hidden, now revealed. With respect to marriage, the gospel, or the Gentiles, the mystery was previously hidden under the old covenant, but now in Christ it has been revealed.
In common parlance, Parousia is used as a technical term for Christ’s Second Coming. This is how the term is used in many works of theology, and accordingly many read that theological meaning back on to the text of Scripture. Yet, this technical usage does not match the New Testament. And so, as we think about the word parousia and the way it is used in the New Testament, we should not demand more of the word than Scripture gives. Rather, we can and should make distinctions between a theological use and a biblical use of the word.
By analogy, this is similar to the word “covenant.” Theologically, many Christians speak about the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, even the covenant of redemption. Yet, these three theological terms are not found in Scripture. Instead, the Bible speaks of a covenant with Abraham or a new covenant. Thus, in speaking about covenant theology, one must distinguish between two domains of discourse (i.e., two ways of speaking)—one doctrinal, the other biblical. Both are needed and both are good, but we can and should make distinctions. That is what is needed here, too.
Parousia and parousia: Distinguishing Two Uses of the Word
To distinguish Parousia (the theological idea) from parousia (the biblical word) we would need to consider all the verses where the term is found in Matthew, Paul, Peter, James, and John. But for now, let me offer a brief reflection on the word itself from Brian Orr. In his book on The Olivet Discourse, here is what he writes on pages 31–33.
Orr’s comments are technical, but they are critical for understanding the difference between Parousia and parousia. He reminds us that the way Christians speak of Christ’s Parousia is often more theological-heavy than anything we find in Scripture. In fact, when we do a word study of the term, we find that the word is often used to speak of Paul, Titus, and other Christian workers (1 Cor. 16:17; 2 Cor. 7:6, 7; 10:10; Phil. 1:26; 2:12). And in one instance it is even used of the man of lawlessness (2 Thess. 2:9). In other words, parousia does not refer to Christ’s Second Coming, except when context dictates (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:23).
Therefore, as we seek to rightly understand the Bible and the doctrine of last things, we should be careful to read Scripture on its own terms. And for many of us, that means re-orienting the way we read the word parousia, so that we can see what the Apostles are saying, without superimposing our eschatology on the New Testament. Certainly, the Apostles affirm the final return of Christ and his judgment of every living thing.
[1] France, Matthew, 785.
[2] TDNT, 5:859.
[3] TDNT, 5:865. In the technical eschatological sense TDNT notes, Parousia only occurs in the Post Apostolic Fathers (“at Dg., 7, 6 and Herm. S. 5, 5,3, cf. also Act. Thom. 28. In Ign. Phld., 9, 2 there is a ref. to the early coming of Jesus”), 5:870.
[4] N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 341. For other types of coming as in “arrival” see 1 Cor 16:17; 2 Cor 7:6, 7; 10:10; Phil 1:26; 2:12.
[5] Carson, Matthew, 1324.
[6] Jordan, Matthew 23–25, 85.
[7] Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 341n95.
[8] Jordan, Matthew 23–25, 87.
[9] BDAG, 780–81.
[10] Both terms erchomai (cf. 1 Cor 4:5; 11:26; 2 Thess 1:10) and parousia (cf. 1 Cor. 15:23; 1 Thess 4:15) can apply to the Second Coming.
[11] France, Matthew, 790.
[12] Ibid.
In response, I will begin to outline the doctrine of the Lord’s imminent return, based upon a reading of the New Testament that understands Christ’s “coming” in the near future as an event that took place in the first century. To be clear, I am not arguing that Christ’s Second Coming came in the first century. Instead, I am arguing that Christ came in judgment upon Jerusalem, as he always promised.
In this way, Christ’s words were always true. Yet, many are the interpreters who misunderstood his words and thus missed how his first century prophesies were fulfilled, and how this fulfillment served as a witness to the world that judgment will eventually come upon all nations, so therefore, repent and believe the gospel.
In this reading of the New Testament eschatology, I am affirming Christ’s Second Coming, often referred to as his Parousia, at the end of time. But I am also affirming the many ways the risen and exalted Christ has come in judgment (cf. Rev. 2:5, 16, 25; 3:20)—both in the first century and every century since. Still, to prove that point, we need to evaluate what Jesus and his Apostles said about his parousia or “coming.” And so in what follows, I want to look at the word parousia to show why its common use as a technical term for Christ’s final coming (Parousia) at the end of the age does not match its biblical use (parousia).
To put it simply, I will show in what follows why Parousia the theological term and parousia the biblical word are not exactly the same.
Parousia in Matthew 24
The word parousia is first used in Matthew 24:3, when the disciples ask Jesus a series of three questions: “Tell us, [1] when will these things happen? And [2] what is the sign of your coming and [3] of the end of the age?” As it is used by these disciples they ask two questions related to Christ’s “coming”—one relates to the sign of his coming and the other relates to the coming of the end of the age.
Notably, Matthew 24 is the only place in the Gospels we find this word—once in the question (v. 3) and three times in Jesus’s answer (vv. 27, 37, 39). First, he describes his coming like “lightning” that “comes from the east and flashes as far as the west.” Next, he compares his coming to the “days of Noah” (Matt. 24:37). And finally, he describes the manner of his coming as the flood. Speaking of those in Noah’s day, “They didn’t know until the flood came and swept them all away. This is the way the coming of the Son of Man will be” (Matt. 24:39).
Remarkably, the other Gospels do not employ parousia, and in the other two places where the Olivet Discourse is found (Mark 13 and Luke 21), Peter, James, John, and Andrew (listed in Mark’s Gospel) do not ask about Jesus’s coming. Instead, they simply ask “when will these things be.” In context, the “these things” relates to the destruction of the temple.
From this use in the Gospels, it seems that parousia is neither a common word (as it is only used four times), nor a technical one. A “technical” term is one that has a fixed meaning wherever it is used. For instance, when Paul uses the word mysterion (“mystery”), it has a fixed meaning: something hidden, now revealed. With respect to marriage, the gospel, or the Gentiles, the mystery was previously hidden under the old covenant, but now in Christ it has been revealed.
In common parlance, Parousia is used as a technical term for Christ’s Second Coming. This is how the term is used in many works of theology, and accordingly many read that theological meaning back on to the text of Scripture. Yet, this technical usage does not match the New Testament. And so, as we think about the word parousia and the way it is used in the New Testament, we should not demand more of the word than Scripture gives. Rather, we can and should make distinctions between a theological use and a biblical use of the word.
By analogy, this is similar to the word “covenant.” Theologically, many Christians speak about the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, even the covenant of redemption. Yet, these three theological terms are not found in Scripture. Instead, the Bible speaks of a covenant with Abraham or a new covenant. Thus, in speaking about covenant theology, one must distinguish between two domains of discourse (i.e., two ways of speaking)—one doctrinal, the other biblical. Both are needed and both are good, but we can and should make distinctions. That is what is needed here, too.
Parousia and parousia: Distinguishing Two Uses of the Word
To distinguish Parousia (the theological idea) from parousia (the biblical word) we would need to consider all the verses where the term is found in Matthew, Paul, Peter, James, and John. But for now, let me offer a brief reflection on the word itself from Brian Orr. In his book on The Olivet Discourse, here is what he writes on pages 31–33.
The Greek word parousia in the Gospels is only used in Matthew 24:3, 27, 37, 39. While modern English translations translate it as “coming," its modern parlance for the Second Coming, as France observes, is not natural to the first-century Jewish audience.[1] In The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), the general meaning of parousia is "presence" and/or "appearing, " with the Hellenistic [Greek] use of the term indicating the visit of a ruler.[2] The TDNT goes on to note that in the NT "the terms [parousia and pareimi] are never used for the coming of Christ in the flesh, and parousia never has the sense of return. The idea of more than one parousia is first found only in the later Church."[3]
N. T. Wright, affirming this position, asks, "Why should we think ... that parousia means 'the second coming,' and/or the downward travel on a cloud of Jesus and/or the 'son of man'? Parousia means 'presence' as opposed to apousia, 'absence.’”[4] Furthermore, what were the disciples expecting to see? Jesus being enthroned as their King. Carson notes that the "term can refer to “presence,” “arrival,” or “coming."[5] James Jordan opts for the English rendering "manifestation,"[6] in that "the most natural meaning of the word as applied to Jesus would be something like 'arrival on the scene,' in the sense of enthronement."[7] Jesus said earlier, that the only sign he would give was the sign of Jonah (Mt 12:39; 16:4). However, it is a complex of signs, embracing the events the disciples asked about.[8]
The lexical data in BDAG notes that its primary meaning is "arrival as the first stage in presence, coming, advent," secondarily referring to "Christ, and nearly always of his Messianic Advent in glory to judge the world at the end of this age."[9] Interestingly, BDAG's entry for parousia reveals the conditioned exegesis we see in modern readers.
As France observes, there is a tradition of interpretation that conflates 24:3 (parousia) with Matthew 24:30, which speaks of Christ's coming but doesn't use parousia. Matthew 24:30 says, "Then the sign of the Son of the Man will appear in the sky, and then all the people of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming (erxomenon) on the clouds of heaven with great glory and power."[10]
Notice BDAG's entry concerning 24:30. It seems to follow a tradition that understands 24:3 and 24:30 are referring to Christ's Second Coming. But this only confuses the situation, lexically speaking, in that BDAG, as observed above, notes "this generation" in 23:36 and 24:34 is the generation of Jesus' contemporaries.
If the generation passages are the same, interpreting 24:34 as a reference to Christ's Second Advent voids the context. However, it is also a possibility that BDAG understands that the Messianic Advent at the end of the age is Christ's judgment on Israel bringing the Old Covenant redemptive system to an end. Therefore, the mistake would fall on those who see BDAG's entry as referring to the second coming of Christ and the consummation of the created order.
France comments that Jesus does not answer the question of his parousia until 24:36,[11] which ultimately has no time indicators, and thus cannot be predicted. It will come without a sign or warning; rather, one will always need to be ready. He writes, "Thus one event (the destruction of the temple) falls within defined and predictable history, and those who know what to look for can see it coming, while the other (the parousia) cannot be tied down to a time frame, and even Jesus does not know when it will be and so will offer no 'sign.’”[12]
Orr’s comments are technical, but they are critical for understanding the difference between Parousia and parousia. He reminds us that the way Christians speak of Christ’s Parousia is often more theological-heavy than anything we find in Scripture. In fact, when we do a word study of the term, we find that the word is often used to speak of Paul, Titus, and other Christian workers (1 Cor. 16:17; 2 Cor. 7:6, 7; 10:10; Phil. 1:26; 2:12). And in one instance it is even used of the man of lawlessness (2 Thess. 2:9). In other words, parousia does not refer to Christ’s Second Coming, except when context dictates (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:23).
Therefore, as we seek to rightly understand the Bible and the doctrine of last things, we should be careful to read Scripture on its own terms. And for many of us, that means re-orienting the way we read the word parousia, so that we can see what the Apostles are saying, without superimposing our eschatology on the New Testament. Certainly, the Apostles affirm the final return of Christ and his judgment of every living thing.
[1] France, Matthew, 785.
[2] TDNT, 5:859.
[3] TDNT, 5:865. In the technical eschatological sense TDNT notes, Parousia only occurs in the Post Apostolic Fathers (“at Dg., 7, 6 and Herm. S. 5, 5,3, cf. also Act. Thom. 28. In Ign. Phld., 9, 2 there is a ref. to the early coming of Jesus”), 5:870.
[4] N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 341. For other types of coming as in “arrival” see 1 Cor 16:17; 2 Cor 7:6, 7; 10:10; Phil 1:26; 2:12.
[5] Carson, Matthew, 1324.
[6] Jordan, Matthew 23–25, 85.
[7] Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, 341n95.
[8] Jordan, Matthew 23–25, 87.
[9] BDAG, 780–81.
[10] Both terms erchomai (cf. 1 Cor 4:5; 11:26; 2 Thess 1:10) and parousia (cf. 1 Cor. 15:23; 1 Thess 4:15) can apply to the Second Coming.
[11] France, Matthew, 790.
[12] Ibid.
Posted in Sunday school
Recent
The Time is Near (Part 2): Eschatological Imminence in the New Testament
August 6th, 2026
Getting Into James, So God's Maturity Gets Into You
July 30th, 2026
Worship as Warfare
July 24th, 2026
The Time is Near (Part 1): Eschatological Imminence in the New Testament
July 17th, 2026
Your Position in Christ vs. Your Condition in Christ
July 10th, 2026
Archive
2026
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
2025
January
April
August
September
November
2024
April
May
August
November
2023
February
September
2022
February
April
September
2021
August
September