Coming on the clouds of heaven

Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see ‘the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven’ with power and great glory.

When people read Jesus saying that he will be "coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" in Matthew 24:30, it often taken to mean that he will be doing that literally as opposed to figuratively.

Surfing Jesus
Kinda like this, but on clouds.
Advertisement

 

Careful now, before you put on your heretic hunting hats and grab your pitchforks — let me explain why I say that Jesus wasn't telling his followers he would be surfing across the sky on literal clouds.

As I pointed out in my last post, to truly understand Jesus, and indeed the New Testament, we need to better know the Old Testament texts. This phrase that Jesus used about "coming on the clouds" is a reference to a prophecy in the book of Daniel in which Daniel see's one who 'looks like a son of man' (ie. a person with a human form) 'coming with the clouds of heaven' which has all sorts of implications that we often miss by either not knowing much of the Old Testament, or because we're not Jewish with a better understanding of these prophecies. As a small note too, it's also these visions of Daniel that Revelation in the New Testament takes a lot of its imagery from and describes the same events – I will be touching on that more in the next part in this series.

Often times, our thoughts on these phrases or this kind of prophetic language, is coloured by our upbringing or teaching from a church, or even by secular culture which has taken this imagery and "hollywoodized" it. You need only Google for "apocalypse" or "armageddon" to see this; and although it can be fun from a film watching perspective, it's not entirely helpful if we are letting modern-day secular films and interpretation influence our reading and understanding of Scripture.

Advertisement

Lets begin by looking at what Daniel saw. A little context first: the setting is Daniel in the throneroom of God, watching as the "court sat in judgment, and the books were opened" to begin a judgement process.

Daniel 7:13-14

As I watched in the night visions,

I saw one like a human being
    coming with the clouds of heaven.
And he came to the Ancient One
    and was presented before him.
To him was given dominion
    and glory and kingship,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
    should serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
    that shall not pass away,
and his kingship is one
    that shall never be destroyed.

Advertisement

That line which says "like a human being" is translated in some Bibles as "like a son of man" which makes Jesus's reference a little clearer when comparing the texts, though the meaning is the same.  

So what's happening in Daniel's vision, and why is Jesus talking about it?

First of all, Jesus isn't just making a reference to this vision of Daniel by talking about clouds. Jesus repeatedly calls himself the "Son of Man" throughout his ministry, which is a veiled reference to what Daniel saw. When the Pharisees were questioning Jesus during his arrest, they asked him bluntly if he was the Messiah (Matt 26:63-65), and how did Jesus answer? By making a reference to Daniel 7:

Jesus said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you,

From now on you will see the Son of Man
    seated at the right hand of Power
    and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

Advertisement

The reaction of High Priest says it all: Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has blasphemed!” This was more than just an idle phrase, this was Jesus making himself equal to God and the Jewish leaders understood this which is why they got so angry. The disciples/apostles understood this about Jesus also, which is what they preached and wrote about and also why they worshipped him (cf. Ps 110:1, Jn 5:18; Matt 26:64, Acts 2:33, Acts 5:31, Rom 8:34, Col 3:1, Heb 1:3, Heb 12:2).

 

Nakedpastor101: Cartoons by David Hayward
'Jesus is coming soon' by Nakedpastor

But what's all this got to do with Jesus coming on the clouds? If Jesus is making a reference to a vision in Daniel, which describes something that happens in a purely spiritual realm, then why all of a sudden, does it become a literal, physical event when it concerns Jesus? Daniel's vision is about the Son of Man coming before the "Ancient One" (ie. God the Father) and being presented with a kingdom, power and authority that will never end – which is exactly what Jesus was preaching about when he said the Kingdom of God/Heaven had arrived with his first coming, even though it was not how the Jewish leaders and people had expected it. It is a spiritual and mystical Kingdom that dwells within us, and is evidenced by our lifestyles being that of those who live under a godly reign in this physical world (Lk 17:20-21; Jn 18:36).

So when Jesus says that he is coming again, and doing so "on the clouds," we must remember that this is a reference to a prophecy set within a context of God doing some judging (Dan 7:10). This language isn't unique to Daniel either, but is a typical example of apocalyptic imagery used by prophets.

Advertisement

*A small note to help clarify some terms here: "apocalypse" is a Greek word which simply means "revealed" or "revelation" - as in, being shown something by divine beings/intervention that was once hidden, and is also a genre of writing in Judaism and Christianity encapsulating prophetic texts of this nature. Likewise, "Armageddon" is a Hebrew word which is the name of a place in Israel. Only in modern culture have these words taken on the meaning "end of the world."

With that in mind, let's look at the other references to God coming on the clouds through the Old Testament, and what it means. I'll add some emphasis to some of the verses just so you can see what I'm pointing out.

Isaiah 19:1-2

An oracle concerning Egypt.

Advertisement

See, the Lord is riding on a swift cloud
    and comes to Egypt;
the idols of Egypt will tremble at his presence,
    and the heart of the Egyptians will melt within them.
I will stir up Egyptians against Egyptians,
    and they will fight, one against the other,
    neighbor against neighbor,
    city against city, kingdom against kingdom;

Nahum 1:5

The mountains quake before him,
    and the hills melt;
the earth heaves before him,
    the world and all who live in it.

Isaiah 34:4

Advertisement

All the host of heaven shall rot away,
    and the skies roll up like a scroll.
All their host shall wither
    like a leaf withering on a vine,
    or fruit withering on a fig tree.

Ezekiel 20:35

and I will bring you into the wilderness of the peoples, and there I will enter into judgment with you face to face.

Plus also see: 2 Sam 22:8-16; Isaiah 19:1; Ezekiel 30:3; Ezekiel 30:18; Ezekiel 32:7; Ezekiel 34:12; Joel 2:1-2 to name a few more!

Notice a theme going on here?

Advertisement

This brings us right back to the disciples asking "what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age" and Jesus saying that he would "come on the clouds with power and great glory." The first thing to take note of here is that the disciples as about the end of the age, although some Bible mistranslate this as "end of the world," which is incorrect since if you check out the underlying Greek text, it uses the word aion (we would understand as "eon" or "age" in English) and not the word for "world" (Gk. kosmos).

Jesus also says that "the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of heaven will be shaken" which sounds pretty cataclysmic on the face of it, until you realise that this yet another reference to an Old Testament prophecy, this time from Isaiah, and possibly also Ezekiel as they use the same kind of language. I'll quote the relevant Isaiah passage, but you can read the other references here: Isa 34:4-5; Ezek 32:7-8.

Isaiah 13:1,10

The oracle concerning Babylon that Isaiah son of Amoz saw ...

For the stars of the heavens and their constellations
    will not give their light;
the sun will be dark at its rising,
    and the moon will not shed its light.

Note that the theme here continues – it is all concerning God visiting a nation with judgement. These nations and cities were destroyed by armies that God used as his weapon of choice, as it were. None of it was a literal event that saw God flying across the sky on clouds, or the stars actually falling out of the sky and going dark! This is all figurative language for a dramatic and drastic change in the world; the heavenly bodies, such as stars and moons etc. are often references to earthly kings and nations, political powers and systems, and their power on or over the Earth.

These are the things that God was going to shake up, blot out and cause to fall: earthly kingdoms, powers and systems. Which is exactly what Jesus was prophesying about in Matthew 24 — the destruction of the Temple and the end of the Old Covenant age, which will usher in the New Covenant in its fullness along with a new age of Grace through and by the life, death, resurrection and forgiveness of Christ!

Jesus's coming which he spoke of here was never to do with a physical return, but was always a prophetic reference to him visiting Jerusalem in judgement, just like God had done in previous generations, when he spoke to the people through prophets using this type of figurative language.

Advertisement

When we can clearly see that all of these visitations by God in the Old Testament, using the same phrases and language that Jesus used, were prophetic and symbolic references to God using armies and other nations to bring war and destruction on something as judgement against them as though God himself had done it, why then do we suddenly expect the complete opposite to happen when Jesus comes?

Now, people will still cling to a physical and literal interpretation of this and use other New Testament quotes to back up that view, such as 2 Peter 3:4,9 which says:

...saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? [...] The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.

Though the dating and authorship of 2 Peter is doubted in academic circles, if we assume that Peter did write this letter, and did so before his death, then it had to be written before 70 AD which is when the Jewish War was happening and the Temple destroyed. Which is what Jesus used as the focal point in his reference to his 'coming'.

Advertisement

You can't use a quote written prior to 70AD to proof text Jesus not coming yet, though that is what often happens. It's like someone in 1938 quoting H.G. Wells saying in 1914 that WWI will be the "war to end all wars" when history quite clearly shows the opposite.

So to conclude, there's nothing in what Jesus says to suggest anything other than a reference to judgement by God on Jerusalem and the Jewish nation, using the symbolic language of the prophets to make his point, that what was to comes was going to be God's judgement on them! 

In the next part of the series I will be taking a closer look at Matthew 24 (and the parallels in the other Gospels) alongside Revelation and seeing how, and if, history shows us that what Jesus prophesied as the signs of his coming were fulfilled. 

If you enjoyed this, leave a comment below.

Advertisement

 


Further Reading:

Subscribe to Updates
Subscribe to:

Have something to say? Leave a comment below.

Leave a comment   Like   Back to Top   Seen 703 times   Liked 0 times

Subscribe to Updates

If you enjoyed this, why not subscribe to free email updates ?

Subscribe today and get a 10% discount code for the online shop!

Subscribe to Blog updates

Enter your email address to be notified of new posts:

Subscribe to:

Alternatively, you can subscribe via RSS

‹ Return to Blog

We never share or sell your email address to anyone.

I've already subscribed / don't show me this again

Recent Posts

Evidence of the Trinity in the Hebrew Scriptures

| 08th November 2017 | Trinity

Table of Contents Jewishness and the Trinity 1. God Is A Plurality The Name Elohim Plural Verbs used with Elohim The Name Eloah Plural Pronouns Plural Descriptions of God The Shema II. God Is At Least Two Elohim and YHVH Applied to Two Personalities III. God Is Three How Many Persons Are There? The Three Personalities in the Same Passage Conclusion New Testament Light I was recently in some discussions/debates online about the nature of God and whether the "Trinity" exists, or if God is purely singular and exists in different forms rather than different persons.   This idea that God has different "forms" or "modes" is what is known as Modalism (also sometimes called Sabellianism). This doctrine was condemned as heresy by Tertullian around 213 AD, and later by the bishop of Rome around 262 AD. A more modern sect of Christians, often called "Oneness Pentecostals", still hold to this heretical doctrine today. Now, to be clear: I do believe in the Trinity and accept that it is the orthodox position to hold. But that doesn't mean I've always fully grasped the concept. This is something Christians have struggled to define for centuries, hence the sometimes confusing and lengthy language of the creeds (see here, here, here and here for example). So after reading this debate online with some Oneness believers, I decided to look more into the Trinity to try and get my head around it as much as possible. On my searching and reading, I came across an article by Arnold Fruchtenbaum on the Jews for Jesus website. He had taken the time to really look into the Tri-unity of God from a Jewish/Hebrew perspective to bring some clarity to the issue. I found the article to be very helpful for my own understanding, and very illuminating to see the plurality of God in oneness hidden within the Hebrew language, something that is often lost in translation to our English bibles. I'm no Hebrew scholar, so rather than try (and probably fail) to explain the language nuances to you, I sought permission to post a copy of the original article here. I hope that the information provided is as helpful to you as it was for me. The original article begins below. Let me know your thoughts in the comments! Jewishness and the Trinity In a recent question-and-answer article, Rabbi Stanley Greenberg of Temple Sinai in Philadelphia wrote: Christians are, of course, entitled to believe in a trinitarian conception of God, but their effort to base this conception on the Hebrew Bible must fly in the face of the overwhelming story of that Bible. Hebrew Scriptures are clear and unequivocal on the oneness of God . . . The Hebrew Bible affirms the one God with unmistakable clarity. Monotheism, an uncompromising belief in one God, is the hallmark of the Hebrew Bible, the unwavering affirmation of Judaism and the unshakable faith of the Jew.” Whether Christians are accused of being polytheists or tritheists or whether it is admitted that the Christian concept of the Tri-unity is a form of monotheism, one element always appears: one cannot believe in the Trinity and be Jewish. Even if what Christians believe is monotheistic, it still does not seem to be monotheistic enough to qualify as true Jewishness. Rabbi Greenberg’s article tends to reflect that thinking. He went on to say, “…under no circumstances can a concept of a plurality of the Godhead or a trinity of the Godhead ever be based upon the Hebrew Bible.” It is perhaps best then to begin with the very source of Jewish theology and the only means of testing it: the Hebrew Scriptures. Since so much relies on Hebrew language usage, then to the Hebrew we should turn. 1. God Is A Plurality The Name Elohim It is generally agreed that Elohim is a plural noun having the masculine plural ending “im.” The very word Elohim used of the true God in Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” is also used in Exodus ...

Should Christians celebrate Halloween?

| 30th October 2017 | Halloween

It's that time of year when you begin to see various articles and debates online about Hallowe'en, and whether it's something that Christians should have any part in. To some people the answer is a straightforward “no”, while others say it falls into the realm of Christian freedom and personal discernment. But what about if you're unsure or somewhere in the middle of those two positions, how should you decide what is the right thing to do? We can all see that the modern celebration of Halloween is focused quite heavily on darkness and evil beings. Here in the UK it's not quite so prevalent; it seems more like an excuse for adults to dress up and have a party as much as the kids do (although with more alcohol involved). American society has really taken the holiday to its extremes with some of the decorations I've seen online and on TV and films, to the point that suicide and murder victims left in public view have been mistaken for scary props! Origins of the holiday Has Hallowe'en always been like this though? Let's take a look at its origins to see where this holiday comes from to help us decide whether we should partake or not. Did you know that Hallowe'en actually started out as a Christian holiday (Holy Day)? “Hallowe’en”, or more precisely, All Hallows Eve (from the Old English hallowed meaning “holy”), is an ancient holiday in the Christian calendar to mark the day before All Saints Day on November 1st. All Saints Day is a day to celebrate and remember the martyrs and all those who have died and gave their lives for the Faith. Originally, this yearly festival began in the 7th century when Pope Boniface IV consecrated the Pantheon, a Roman temple to the gods. This then became a church called St. Mary of the Martyrs, and the date of the consecration, May 13th, was to be celebrated annually thereafter as the Feast of the Holy Martyrs. This was then later changed to November 1st by Pope Gregory IV in 835 AD to commemorate the dedication of St. Peter's Basilica in Rome to all of the saints. The feast day was then extended and made universal to include all the saints who had died, not just martyrs, since there had become too many to individually commemorate. And thus, All Saints Day was born. This isn't even the earliest time that martyrs were remembered as a formal event, as the practice goes way back to at least 135 AD which we can read about in the Martyrdom of Polycarp. In it the believers are said to treat the bones of Polycarp as “more precious than the most exquisite jewels, and more purified than gold”. The next reference comes around 250 AD. In Epistle 36 of Cyprian, he states that the Church should take note of the days in which the martyrs are killed: Finally, also, take note of their days on which they depart, that we may celebrate their commemoration among the memorials of the martyrs … there are celebrated here by us oblations and sacrifices for their commemorations There's also other early references to this practice in sermons by Ephrem the Syrian (373 AD) and John Chrysostom (407 AD), so we can see from the existing historical documents that celebrating the lives of martyrs and “saints” has been long observed within the Church, with the first record being in what is now modern-day Turkey. Aren’t there pagan roots? There is often a lot of references to Hallowe'en being an ancient Celtic festival of Samhain (pronounced Sow-in, a Gaelic word meaning “end of the summer”), originating in Ireland over 2000 years ago. The story goes that this was always the time when the Celts celebrated their dead, and as Christianity spread, the Pope “replaced” the pagan festival with a “Christianised” version to try and convert people easier. But there are a few issues with this version of events, and the historical timeline that it’s meant to follow. For starters, if it truly were an ancient Celtic festival, then the historical documents we have from the early Church shoul...

American Gun Violence and the Early Church on War and Violence

| 03rd October 2017 | Early Church

In light of the sad, recent events in the Las Vegas shooting — and similar events in America— I often see Christians across social media jumping to the defence of gun ownership whenever there is even a slight hint at gun control in America. But how has gun culture become so ingrained in American Christianity when we can observe a clear theme and pattern of thought in the first few centuries of the Church, which goes completely against this? Update 7th Nov 2017: It's so sad to have to update this post on the same subject so soon, almost a month to the day. Yet another shooting, this time in Texas where 26 people have been shot dead in a church of all places. But despite this, America tightens its grip on their guns, and Trump says tighter gun laws would have made no difference to the situation. Days earlier though, when a terrorist killed 8 people in NYC by running them down with a truck, President Trump was quick to tweet about implementing "extreme vetting" of immigrants. Yet again, voices are loud for everything else except curbing gun ownership, and the silence from the Church in America is still deafening. You can read more in the link below, but here's a few examples from the early Church with regards to war and violence, and using or owning weapons: “It is not lawful for a Christian to bear arms for any earthly consideration.” — Marcellus ~298 AD “Under no circumstances should a true Christian draw the sword.” — Tertullian 155-230 AD “God wished iron to be used for the cultivation of the earth, and therefore it should not be used to take human life.”  — Cyprian ~250 AD “The servants of God do not rely for their protection on material defenses but on the pine Providence.”  — Ambrose 338-397 AD I don't have an answer to this cultural problem, and I'm not sure we can ever fully solve the issues of gun violence in the States now; but one thing that I do know is this: the Church in America needs to repent of its idolatry of guns, turn back to God and focus on the love of Christ again, and not on the weapons of destruction. Even if the rest of society clings to their guns, the Church should be the ones clinging to the Prince of Peace instead, and rejecting anything that could cause another harm. You can't love your neighbour or your enemies if you are willing to kill them (Matthew 22:36-40; Matthew 5:44-45). Matthew 26:52Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword. There is no room in the teaching or examples of Jesus, nor in the New Testament epistles, to give those who claim the name of Christ, permission to kill another human being! And before you head to the comments to write it, no, Jesus didn't command that we own weapons — Luke 22:36 is taken entirely out of context if you believe that, along with Exodus 22:2 if your thoughts were taking you there next. As John Piper puts it, "Does it accord with the New Testament to encourage the attitude that says, “I have the power to kill you in my pocket, so don’t mess with me”? My answer is, No.". Which is as Paul also taught in Romans: "Do not repay anyone evil for evil" and to "never avenge yourselves" (Rom 12:17, 19) because that is the role of the Lord, not us. Clearly this teaching of non-violence was something that was understood pretty well by the Early Church, as the quotes above point out. We have documented teaching from the first two centuries by those who were taught by the Apostles and who followed in their (and Jesus') instructions, rejecting any and all forms of violence and weapon bearing.  So where did it all go wrong and change?   See more early Church quotes on war and violence here: rogueminister.wordpress.com/.../quotes-the-early-church-on-war-and-violence/ Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.   Further Reading: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/02/las-vegas-shooting-wh...

My Upcoming Book

| 09th August 2017 | My Books

It's been a little quiet from me over here, but not for lack of things to write! I have been busy putting together a book based on the Lenten series I recently did this Easter just gone. It has been reformatted for paperback and soon to follow, eBook/Kindle too, as a daily reading plan not just to be read during Lent but can be read as your own personal reading plan over a forty day period of your choosing. The book will also be released with a companion book which will contain all of the full, original texts from the relevant Church Fathers that are included within the forty day plan. You can read more about it, and follow any updates here on this promo page: 40-days-with-the-fathers.html  ...