Читать книгу Understanding the New Testament and the End Times, Second Edition - Rob Dalrymple - Страница 10

And after John had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1:14–15)

The end times are a present reality since the first coming of Jesus. This is the conviction of Peter, Paul, John, Jude, and the author of the epistle to the Hebrews. The conviction that the present time is the “end time” derives from the belief of the apostles that Jesus is Israel’s promised Messiah in whose person, ministry, death, and resurrection God has fulfilled his promises of salvation.50

Introduction

In the previous chapter it was argued that the Bible must be read in light of Jesus. He is the fulfillment of the entirety of the narrative of God’s work of redemption and restoration. Now I wish to venture further and suggest that the coming of Christ must not only be understood in terms of the fulfillment of the OT story, but also in terms of the inauguration of the kingdom of God, which itself is the beginning of the eschaton (i.e., end times, last days, etc.). Thus, in contrast to many of the popular conceptions that suggest that the end times are future, it is my contention, which is widely acknowledged among the scholarly world, that they began with the coming of Christ, continue in the present through the work of the Spirit, and await the consummation at his return.51

The importance of understanding that the kingdom of God has come in and through Christ cannot be overstated. For the central thesis in this book is that eschatology matters. It matters because we are living in the eschaton. We are not waiting for it to come. We are not called to scour the newspapers and Internet to discern if the “signs of the times” are being fulfilled in our generation. Instead, we are to be busy living in the kingdom as agents of the kingdom! Thus, understanding the NT from the perspective that in Jesus the eschaton has arrived not only provides a needed clarity to the message of the NT, but it also more clearly delineates the nature and mission of God’s people. To say that Christ came the first time to be our Savior and to die for our sins and that he will return to become the king not only overly simplifies things, but also fails to understand the mission of Jesus and the nature of the kingdom of God.

The question I wish to investigate, then, throughout this chapter is: Does viewing the NT and the life of Jesus from an eschatological perspective provide the best foundation for understanding the NT? G. K. Beale, in fact, suggests, “Just as when you put on green sunglasses, everything you see is green, so Christ through the Spirit had placed eschatological sunglasses on his disciples so that everything they looked at in the Christian faith had an end-time tint.”52

Understanding the NT in Light of the End Times

I often ask my seminary students several questions that appear on the surface to be simple Bible trivia. The answers, however, are not straightforward. In fact, I would suggest that these conundrums are only solvable when one reads the NT from the perspective that Jesus was ushering in, and did usher in, the eschaton!

First, I will ask, “Why was Jesus baptized?” It is interesting to watch graduate students wrestle with what on the surface appears to be a very simple question—after all, the event must have been important since it is either described or referenced in each of the four Gospels.53 It doesn’t take long for the students to begin speculating: “He did so in order to be an example to us.” This is the most common assertion.

The problem is that the NT never says that Jesus was baptized as an example for us. If this were the reason, then one might expect Paul to reference the baptism of Jesus as a model for Christian baptism. But he does not. I would go so far, in fact, as to say that none of Jesus’ disciples would have even thought that he was baptized merely as an example for them. Furthermore, if Jesus’ baptism primarily served as an example for us, then we might suggest that the Gospel writers would have preferred to omit this event. For, the writers of the NT could well have challenged the first Christians to be baptized in light of the fact that they themselves were baptized, or they could have appealed to the fact that Jesus commanded them to be baptized (Matt 28:18–20). There was no real need to affirm that Jesus was baptized. After all, the baptizing of Jesus with a “baptism of repentance” only raises questions. Why was Jesus baptized with a baptism of repentance when he was without sin? It may well have been easier to simply omit references to Jesus’ baptism. Yet, all four Gospels mention John the Baptist, and the Synoptics54 all have Jesus being baptized by him.

Another conundrum in the NT is: Why does Matthew’s Gospel note that the angel tells Joseph to name the child Immanuel (Matt 1:23), yet two verses later they name him Jesus? And, in fact, Jesus is never called Immanuel in the NT! Even more problematic is the fact that Matthew cites Isaiah 7:14 and claims this as the first of his five famed “fulfillment passages.”55 Yet, if Jesus is never named Immanuel then does this really constitute a fulfillment?

Thirdly, why are the first words in the Gospel of John, “In the beginning” (John 1:1)? This is a clear allusion to Genesis 1. But why does John cite Genesis 1 when there appears to be no overt reference to the creation account in the Fourth Gospel?

Finally, why does Matthew begin his Gospel with a genealogy? For most of us genealogies are something found in the OT. Why, then, does the NT begin with one? Many have suggested that Matthew draws a connection to David in his lineage thereby demonstrating that Jesus is qualified to be the king. Such is indeed true. But a closer look at Matthew 1:1–17 confirms that Matthew explicitly draws up his genealogy into three distinct sections, each comprising fourteen generations: “Therefore all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to the time of Christ fourteen generations” (1:17). Yet, a problem arises when one compares the genealogy of Matthew with the corresponding genealogies in the OT56; for Matthew, in order to have fourteen generations in each segment, has had to omit names.57 Why did Matthew do this? Why was it important that he classified Jesus’ ancestry into three groups? And why was it important that they be delineated into groups of fourteen generations?

Only after we have sufficiently understood Jesus as the end times prophet58 who was announcing in his presence and his ministry the fulfillment of all of God’s covenant promises, can we begin to fully appreciate these and many other aspects of the life of Jesus. Furthermore, with a focus on Jesus as the end times prophet, not only do many aspects of the Gospel come to life, but only then can we begin to look at our mission as the people of God in an end times context.

The Story Is About Jesus and the Inauguration of the Eschaton

That the coming of Christ in the opening of each of the Gospels is closely viewed in connection with the OT is beyond dispute. Matthew’s Gospel commences with a genealogy that clearly serves to identify Jesus with the story of the OT.59 The Gospel of Mark opens with a composite citation of Isaiah 40:3; Exodus 23:20; and Malachi 3:1 that serves to identify the coming of John the Baptist as the herald of the promise coming of Christ.60 Luke’s opening two chapters contain a plethora of OT citations and allusions.61 And the Gospel of John begins by quoting Genesis: “In the beginning” (1:1). In each instance, the Gospels are connecting the narrative of Jesus with the OT story.

Upon closer examination, we note that the Gospel writers intended us to see the coming of Christ both as the fulfillment of the entirety of the OT story and as the inauguration of the end times.62 It is too simple, then, to merely state that John 1:1 alludes to the creation narrative in Genesis. Instead, John wants us to not only see Jesus in light of the creation narrative of Genesis, but also in terms of a new creation. That is, “In the beginning” not only serves to connect the story of Jesus with Genesis and the OT, but also in an eschatological—forward-looking—sense. Thus, with the coming of Jesus we have “in the beginning” a reference to the New Creation.

One may also read the Gospel of Mark in such a light as well. In his opening citation he references Isaiah 40:3; Exodus 23:20; and Malachi 3:1. Each of these verses employs the term “road/way” (Greek: hodos). This term occurs in Exodus 23:20 in connection with the exodus of Israel out of Egypt. Isaiah then picks up the term and applies it in the context of the end times return of God and his people in terms of a new exodus.63 The use of hodos in Malachi 3:1 then extends the end times dimension of the restoration of God’s people by associating it with the return of God himself to his temple.64 In citing these verses in the opening of his Gospel, Mark, then, is able to associate the coming of John the Baptist, and ultimately of Christ himself, with the theme of exodus and the return of the people of Israel from the exile. In fact, the coming of Christ and the return from the exile is itself the beginning of a new exodus.

That the new exodus in Mark 1:2–3 is focused on the end times derives from the fact that Mark presents the story of Jesus in terms of bringing to a climax the story of Scripture. Hence, Mark introduces Jesus as the one who proclaims, “The time is fulfilled; the kingdom of God is at hand” (Mark 1:15). Such an event is best described as “eschatological.” In light of this, we are justified in reading the Gospels, and the entire NT for that matter, from the perspective that Jesus is ushering in the eschaton (end times).

We must understand that the prophecies of the OT regarding the restoration of the people are inherently tied to what we tend to call the end times. To somehow separate the work of Christ in his first coming and the return of Christ to the extent that in his return he ushers in the end is to insert a break that the writers of the NT and the Jewish world at the time of Jesus would never have understood. That is, the prophecies that Jesus fulfills are part and parcel of the prophecies of the end times. It is true, as we see from the rest of the NT and the pages of history, that Jesus did not completely bring about the New Creation in totality—for sin and death remain. But to say that Jesus did not inaugurate the end times is to seriously misunderstand his mission. To say that the Gospels are eschatological and that they present the inauguration of the climax of the OT story does not mean that they are marking the completion of the end also. For we realize that evil, suffering, and death still exist. It is this tension between the continuing presence of evil and the present reign of Christ that has led to much confusion among many Christians in regard to eschatology and the end times.

Furthermore, many are hindered from understanding Jesus as the fulfillment of the OT promises by the fact that some of the prophesies of the OT incorporate a finality or totality to them; that is, the effect is eternal or catastrophic, perhaps even resulting in the destruction of the cosmos. Naturally, many conclude that since this aspect of a given prophecy has yet to occur, then the prophecy has clearly not yet been fulfilled. Thus, they look to the second coming of Jesus as the fulfillment of a given prophecy. This is a very Western (either/or) way of thinking. For example, it is assumed that since the result of a given prophecy is the dissolution of the heavens, and since such has not occurred, then the fulfillment of the prophecy must await the future. Such thinking is not inherently wrong.

But what if the fulfillment of prophecy is more complex than this? Is it not possible that the fulfillment of a prophecy may happen over time? Might not the fulfillment of a prophecy have already begun in Christ, and continue in the life of God’s people today, and climax in the New Jerusalem? That is, do we necessarily have to view a prophecy as being fulfilled at only one point in time? For, as I will contend in chapters 6 and 7, the NT identifies Jesus as the temple of God in fulfillment of the OT promises of the restoration of God’s presence among his people. Yet, we also find that the NT people of God are the temple of God in continuity with the OT and Jesus as the temple. Finally, we see that the New Jerusalem is the climax of the promises of the temple. Thus, the promises of the restoration of the temple begin to find their fulfillment in Jesus, they continue to find their fulfillment in the NT people of God, and they are ultimately fulfilled in the New Jerusalem.

Jesus’ Ministry in an End Times Context

It is necessary at this point to continue our investigation into the nature of the NT and the end times by looking at three arguments that the NT presents the person and ministry of Jesus in an end times or “eschatological” context.

The NT Presents the Teachings of Jesus in an End Times Context by Using Apocalyptic Language

First, understanding the NT in an end times context makes sense of the apocalyptic language used to describe the events in the life of Jesus and the coming of the Spirit. Thus, the first coming of Christ was an eschatological event for which the best language to depict was apocalyptic. What the prophets had looked forward to now finds its consummation in Jesus.

What is apocalyptic language? To put it simply, I prefer to define apocalyptic language as “the use of ‘cosmic upheaval’ language and imagery to describe events of ‘covenantal significance.’”65 By “cosmic upheaval” language I am referring to such things as the stars falling from heaven,66 the sun becoming darkened,67 the moon turning into blood,68 and earthquakes.69 By events of “covenantal significance” I mean that the events themselves are in the context of the fulfillment of God’s covenantal promises of redemption and restoration.

Now, for many of us who have read the Gospel stories depicting the events of the cross, resurrection, and the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost, this language has failed to conjure the tremendous significance of these events. We have simply concluded, often not even recognizing the apocalyptic nature of the language, that some supernatural phenomena occurred at the cross and at the pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost.70

A problem at this point is that many readers may feel a bit uneasy at the notion that Jesus and the NT writers employed apocalyptic language. It is important that we understand that ancient writers employed this genre because it allowed them an avenue to move their readers/hearers emotionally as well as intellectually. Plain narration, as in most stories, may well persuade some, but if writers truly want to impact their readers/hearers, they must also learn to tell their stories in a manner that moves people emotionally.

NT’s Use of Apocalyptic Catchphrase “He Who Has Ears, Let Him Hear”

That we are to read portions of the NT within an apocalyptic framework is apparent from the use of the phrase “he who has ears let him hear.”71 For some readers, this phrase may resonate from the seven letters written in the book of Revelation. Indeed, each of seven letters incorporates this phrase.72 By use of this apocalyptic catchphrase, John warns his readers/hearers to listen carefully to what is said. In addition to warning the readers/hearers to pay attention, this phrase also serves as an apocalyptic warning to listen carefully because the words are difficult to understand and only those with ears to hear will comprehend.73

This phrase also appears in the prophets of the OT. In Ezekiel the phrase is used in conjunction with a prophetic message from a prophet to the house of Israel. It serves as a stern warning. For example, Ezekiel is told, “Thus says the Lord God. ‘He who hears, let him hear; and he who refuses, let him refuse’” (3:27).

The NT, however, most likely utilizes this phrase in light of the commissioning of Isaiah.74 Isaiah is told go and prophesy to the people, “Keep on listening, but do not perceive; Keep on looking, but do not understand. Render the hearts of this people insensitive, their ears dull, and their eyes dim, lest they see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and return and be healed” (6:9–10). “He who has ears to hear” thus suggests that the prophetic message will not be heard by all, but only by those with “ears to hear.”75

The apocalyptic aspect of this phrase then incorporates the notion that the prophets’ messages were not easily understood. The relative obscurity of their messages allowed them to further harden the hearts of those without ears and eyes,76 and to exhort those with ears and eyes to respond.77 It is this dual sense that stands behind the use of this phrase in the commands of Revelation 2–3. The apocalyptic vision of John and his message to the seven churches will only be heard by some. Those who hear must also “heed” and do the things “written in it” (Rev 1:3). Thus, this phrase served as a prophetic indication that the apocalyptic message of the prophets must be obeyed. Those without ears and eyes will only be further hardened in their unbelief and idolatry.

Jesus Uses “He Who Has, Ears Let Him Hear”

The importance of this discussion is that this catchphrase also appears in the words of Jesus. In fact, each of the Synoptics record that Jesus uttered this phrase.78 The most significant use of this phrase occurs in the parable of the Sower.79 This parable, which is one of only two parables in the Gospel of Mark, serves to lay a foundation for understanding the teachings of Jesus: “Do you understand this parable? And how will you understand all the parables?” (4:13). Thus, Jesus employed this apocalyptic catchphrase both to associate his message with that of the prophets and to mark his coming within an apocalyptic context.

Therefore, in accord with Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, Jesus arrives as an eschatological prophet who announces, by means of apocalyptic language, a message to the people of God. The difference between Jesus and the prophets is that, whereas the prophets announced that the kingdom of God was coming, Jesus announced that it was present in himself.80

The NT Uses Apocalyptic Language for Numerous Events In the Life of Jesus

Secondly, it is important to note that in several places the events of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, as well as the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost, are depicted by means of apocalyptic imagery.81 The depiction of these events in apocalyptic language suggests that the biblical writers understood Christ’s first coming in terms of the arrival of the eschaton.

For example, Matthew records that while Jesus was on the cross, “And behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom, and the earth shook; and the rocks were split, and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many” (27:51–52). Matthew, Mark, and Luke all note, “And when the sixth hour had come, darkness fell over the whole land until the ninth hour” (Matt 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44). And in Acts 2, at the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, Peter cites Joel 2 to explain the significance of what has transpired: “‘And it shall be in the last days,’ God says, ‘That I will pour forth of My Spirit upon all humankind; . . . And I will grant wonders in the sky above, and signs on the earth beneath, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the great and glorious day of the Lord shall come’” (Acts 2:17, 19–20).82

The use of such apocalyptic imagery—of stars falling, the sky darkening, and earthquakes opening the tombs of the dead—clearly places these events in an end times context. The problem for many at this point is that they associate the end times with the end. And indeed this is true. What, then, is the significance in pointing out that such language is also used of these key events in the life of Christ and the coming of the Spirit? This must mean that in Christ the end has begun!83

Thus, we should begin to view the entirety of the NT within an end times context. This explains why Jesus incorporated the language of the apocalyptic prophets. Moreover, the NT clearly places the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and the coming of the Spirit in an apocalyptic context. In doing so, they relate these events to the inauguration of the fulfillment of the covenant promises of Scripture. With the coming of Christ and his baptism, the kingdom of God has begun and the kingdom of this world is coming to an end.

Any view, then, that presents the end times as something primarily future fails to account for the presence of apocalyptic language throughout the Gospels and the importance of such for the proclamation that in Jesus the kingdom of God has come.

Jesus as the End Times Prophet Who Announced the Coming of the Kingdom of God in His Presence and His Summons to Follow Him

The OT story ends with the people of God in a state of exile; or, more accurately as slaves on the land God gave them: “Behold, we are slaves today, and as to the land which You gave to our fathers to eat of its fruit and its bounty, behold, we are slaves in it” (Neh 9:36).84 The promise of land is perhaps the key theme of the OT covenant. The OT promises that if Israel obeys the covenant then they will enjoy peace and prosperity on the land.85 But their failure to obey meant that they would be sent from the land into exile.86 Exile, however, meant not only their removal from the land, but also their loss of the presence of Yahweh.87 God himself would leave them. After all of this occurred, more prophets arose and announced that if the people repent God would restore them to the land.88 But it is not merely the people of Israel that would be restored to the land; God himself would also return to the land.

It is this context in which we must read John the Baptist’s proclamation, citing Isaiah 40:3, that he is the one who will “clear the way for the LORD in the wilderness; Make smooth in the desert a highway for our God” (Mark 1:2–3; Luke 3:4). The coming of Christ is indeed the fulfillment of Yahweh returning to the land. This is central to understanding the NT and the inauguration of the end times in Christ. Jesus was much more than God in the flesh who was sent to die on the cross and pay for our sins. Jesus was God in the flesh who was returning to be among his people!89

Thus, it was Jesus himself, the very presence of God among humankind, that established the beginning of the kingdom of God. This is the significance of Jesus’ proclamation that “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent and believe the gospel” (Mark 1:15).90 This is also why Jesus proclaimed that “the kingdom of God is in your midst” (Luke 17:21). And in Luke 11:20 Jesus announces, “But if I cast out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.” The presence of Christ is the fulfillment of the presence of the kingdom of God. And this entails the restoration of God among his people! Thus, what is announced in the opening of the Gospels serves to place the incarnation in the context of the inauguration of the kingdom of God.

Thus, the NT uses apocalyptic language to describe the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, and the coming of the Holy Spirit. This apocalyptic language associates the events in the life of Christ and the coming of the Spirit in the context of the end. Jesus, also, employed apocalyptic language in his teaching. As a result, we see that in Christ himself the kingdom of God is now present. The end has come—though not fully, for death, sin, and suffering remain.

The Kingdom of God That Jesus Announced Is the Fulfillment of All God’s Promises: The Eschaton Has Begun to Arrive

That the kingdom of God is already present throughout the entire NT era is further evidenced by the consistent use of end times designations for the present in the NT. First, we find that throughout the NT the term “last days” is consistently utilized to refer to the present. In Acts 2:17, Peter cites Joel 2 to explain the significance of the events that transpired with the pouring out of the Spirit and he concludes, “‘And it shall be in the last days,’ God says, ‘that I will pour forth of My Spirit upon all humankind’” (Acts 2:17). The epistles also use the term “last days” and apply it to the present. Paul does so in 2 Timothy 3:1.91 Peter, likewise, warns his readers about men in the last days.92 The author of Hebrews similarly states, “God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world” (1:1–2). And, 1 John goes so far as to claim that these are not only the last days, but it is the “last hour” (2:18).

Conclusion

So, how does all of this relate to the opening questions?: Why then was Jesus baptized? Why was Jesus named Immanuel? Why does Matthew begin his Gospel with a genealogy? Why does the Gospel of John begin with “In the beginning”?

In all of these we find that the Gospel writers were linking the events of the coming of Christ, from his incarnation to his death and resurrection, with the fulfillment of the covenant promises of God and the coming of the kingdom of God. Jesus is baptized with a baptism of repentance on behalf of the nation because he knew that repentance must precede the restoration of Israel.93 So, he repents for the nation.94 Thus, in his repentance and baptism the “kingdom of God is at hand” (Mark 1:15).

Jesus is Immanuel (Matt 1:25) because he is himself the embodiment of YHWH returning to the land and the end of the exile. Hence, Mark’s opening citation: “The voice of one crying in the wilderness, ‘Make ready the way of the Lord, Make His paths straight’” (1:3). Mark sees, in John the Baptist’s cry, Jesus as the “Lord” who is returning from the wilderness! Thus, the baby is named Jesus. But it must be understood that Immanuel is who he is.

Matthew’s Gospel commences with a genealogy (1:2–17) because it serves to identify Jesus with the completion of the story of the OT. The story, as Matthew frames it, begins with Abraham and runs to David, then from David to the exile, then from the exile to Jesus: “Therefore all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to the time of Christ fourteen generations” (1:17). Matthew, therefore, is announcing in Jesus that the era of the exile is over and the story of Israel has come to its fulfillment in Jesus.

Why does John 1:1 begin with a clear allusion to Genesis 1:1? The Gospel of John begins by quoting Genesis because John wishes for us to see in the coming of Christ the beginning of the New Creation. Thus, for John the “beginning” is a new beginning in Jesus.

What might this mean for us? First, it means that in Jesus we have the fulfillment of God’s covenant promises and that we must read the Bible in this light. Secondly, it means that the eschaton (end times) has begun in Jesus. We live in the “last days.” The “last days” then are not something to query about as though they are future and potentially not important. Instead, they are something for us to presently endure.95 Finally, the inauguration of the New Creation in Jesus means that our mission as God’s people entails the bringing in of the New Creation.96

One of the difficulties that many have at this juncture relates to the problem of the future of the kingdom. Many of us have become so accustomed to thinking of the end times as something wholly in the future that we have trouble grasping the present reality of the kingdom. Some, perhaps, are concerned with how this might affect our view of the return of Christ. Though this is understandable, we must warn against the urge to hold so tightly to one perspective that we neglect other truths simply because they are problematic for us. We must find room in our convictions for the whole counsel of God.

The end has begun in Christ, and yet we also affirm that Christ will return to consummate his kingdom.

50. Schnabel, 40 Questions, 25.

51. I am not making any claims as to the nature and timing of the millennium. For the reader who is aware of such theology, I will only say that whether the millennium is present or future is secondary at this time. I am fully aware of the theological intricacies of premillennialism, postmillennialism, and amillennialism. However, I do believe that proponents of each of the views should be able to affirm the main thrust of this chapter and this book as a whole.

52. Beale, New Testament Biblical Theology, 18. On the same page Beale adds, “This means that the doctrine of eschatology in NT theology textbooks should not merely be one among many doctrines that are addressed but should be the lens through which all the doctrines are best understood.”

53. Cf. Matt 3:13–17; Mark 1:9–11; Luke 3:21–22; John 1:29–34.

54. The word “Synoptics” means “seeing together” and refers to Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The term comes from the fact that these three Gospels are very similar in their overall content.

55. The five “fulfillment passages” in Matt 1–2 are: 1:18–25; 2:1–12; 2:13–15; 2:16–18; 2:19–23. In each account Matthew narrates an event in Jesus’ birth and childhood in accord with the OT in order to demonstrate that Jesus fulfilled the Scripture.

56. Cf. 1 Chr 2:1–15; 3:10–24.

57. One need only realize that the third section of Matthew’s genealogy spans five hundred years and has only fourteen generations to see that names have been omitted. See Leon Morris, Gospel according to Matthew, 22.

58. That is, the prophet that ushers in the end times. Now, I fully understand that Jesus was much more than the eschatological prophet. The focus here is merely on this aspect of Jesus’ identity and ministry.

59. That Matthew’s genealogy serves to identify Jesus with the story of the OT and not merely the lineage of Abraham and David is evident in the intended structure of the genealogy. Matthew notes in 1:17 that there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, and from David to the exile, and from the exile to Jesus. This arrangement of the genealogy suggests that the story of Israel, which moves from Abraham to David, from David to the exile, and the exile to Jesus, finds its consummation in Jesus. (Note: The exile refers to the sending out as captives of the people of Israel at the hands of foreign nations. The northern kingdom of Israel was sent out by the Assyrians in 721 BC and the southern kingdom of Judah was sent out in 605 BC.)

60. Cf. Mark 1:2–3.

61. Luke’s use of the OT is significant despite the fact that he does not extensively cite the OT. Pao and Schnabel note, “Luke’s use of the OT Scripture underlies his conviction that the OT prophetically announced Jesus’ life and ministry” (“Luke,” in Beale and Carson, Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, 252).

62. Beale goes so far as to claim, “it should not be astonishing to discover that eschatology is a dominant idea in the NT” (New Testament Biblical Theology, 129).

63. In Isa 40–66 the people of Israel are in exile. They are viewed as already having been sent out of the land. Isa 40–66 then predicts the eschatological return of the people. (Note: Isaiah employs an abundance of exodus imagery to depict the return of the people to the land.)

64. In Malachi the coming of the messenger clears the way and the “Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come into His temple” (3:1). Thus, Malachi associates the future restoration of God’s people with the exodus of the past and looks forward to the restoration of God’s presence among his people. See ch. 7 for a look at the temple in the NT.

65. The more technical answer as to the nature of apocalyptic itself is that it is “A genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar as it involves another, supernatural world” (Collins, “Introduction,” 5). David Aune proposed a change that omits mediation by an otherworldly being, and adds “in autobiographical form” and “revelatory visions . . . so structured that the central revelatory message constitutes a literary climax” (Aune, “Apocalypse,” 86–87). Apocalyptic language is just language used to describe such a worldview. The difficulty in defining the genre is that no one work displays all the characteristics set forth as apocalyptic.

66. Mark 13:25; cf. also Luke 21:25; Rev 8:12.

67. Matt 24:29; Mark 13:24.

68. Acts 2:20; Rev 6:12.

69. Matt 27:54; 28:2; Rev 11:3.

70. The events at the cross that may be viewed as apocalyptic include: darkness (Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44), an earthquake (Matt 27:51), tearing of the temple veil (Matt 27:51; Luke 23:45), and the bodies of the dead walking around town (Matt 27:52). The apocalyptic like events at Pentecost include: the presence of a violent wind, tongues of fire coming upon the people, and people speaking in foreign tongues (Acts 2:2–4). See below for further discussion.

71. Rev 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22; 13:9; Matt 11:15; 13:9, 43; Mark 4:9, 23; Luke 8:8; 14:35.

72. Rev 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22.

73. This is why Jesus used this phrase with reference to his parables. Cf. Mark 4:9, 23; Matt 11:15; 13:9, 43.

74. Cf. Isa 6; cf also, Jer 5:21; 17:23.

75. Note that Jesus was explaining all of his parables to his disciples privately (Mark 4:34). Thus, even the disciples did not understand the parable, but since they have “ears to hear” Jesus explained things to them.

76. Cf. Isa 6:9–10; Jer 5:21; 17:23.

77. Cf. Ezek 3:25.

78. Cf. Matt 11:15; 13:9, 43; Mark 4:9, 23; Luke 8:8; 14:35.

79. Note that Mark clearly associates this phrase with the prophetic commissioning of Isaiah 6 (cf. Mark 4:10–12; Isa 6:9–11).

80. Cf. Mark 1:15; Luke 17:21.

81. It is superfluous for our purposes to debate the historicity of such events. That is, many wish to reject the historicity of these events because they are depicted in apocalyptic terms. Others will deny that the language is apocalyptic because they fear that by doing so the historicity of the events will be questioned. The proper response is to recognize the clear use of apocalyptic language and then to determine how that may or may not affect the historicity of the events.

82. Cf. Joel 2:30–31.

83. Now, one may ask, end of what? This will be explored more fully in ch. 7. For now, let us note that the end of the kingdom of this world has begun!

84. Cf. Ezra 9:9. This significant thesis has been worked out thoroughly in the work of NT Wright. See his The New Testament and the People of God and Jesus and the Victory of God.

85. Cf. Deut 28:3–6; Lev 26:3–10.

86. This is clearly set forth in the covenant. If the Israelites disobey and break the covenant with God, then they will be uprooted from the land (cf. Deut 28:32–37, 49, 64). Leviticus uses even more graphic language when it says that the land will “spew you out” (Lev 18:28; ESV, NET, NKJ all say “vomit”).

87. Yahweh (often spelled without the vowels YHWH) is the covenant name for God in Hebrew (cf. Exod 3:14–15). The English equivalent is “Lord,” but one must be careful because “Lord” translates both Yahweh and Adonai. The Greek uses Kurios.

88. The prophets do so in accord with Deut 30:1–6. This is clear in 2 Chr 6:37–39; 7:14.

89. This is the significance of the temple in Scripture, as we will examine in chs. 6–7.

90. Though the NIV and NET translate the verse by saying that the kingdom of God “is near,” we must note that the Greek engiken commonly expresses a spatial nearness more than a temporal one. That is, the nearness is not one of time, in the sense that it will come soon. Instead, the nearness is to be found spatially in the nearness of the person of Christ himself. See Edwards, Gospel according to Mark, 46–47.

91. Though some suggest that Paul was informing Timothy about what it will be like (future) in the last days, the use of the present imperatives (“realize this” in 2 Tim 3:1; and “avoid such men” in 3:5) strongly suggests that Paul was informing Timothy of a present crisis for which he needed to be prepared. This understanding accords with the rest of 2 Timothy, which focuses on Paul’s appeals to Timothy to maintain his ministry.

92. Cf. 2 Pet 3:3.

93. This is especially clear in the covenant itself (cf. Deut 30:1–6). That repentance must precede the restoration is also evident in Daniel’s prayer in Daniel 9.

94. This does not negate repentance on the part of the people, hence John the Baptist’s message of repentance and the continued focus of the NT on the need to repent and be saved (cf. Acts 2:38; 3:19; 8:22; 17:30; 26:20).

95. We will explore this facet of the eschaton in ch. 8.

96. This we will explore more fully in ch. 12.