The Olivet Questions

How The Disciples Understood Parousia

Only four of the twelve disciples approached Jesus on the Mount of Olives, in order to get clarification and meaning on his “not one stone left upon another” statement. The four were Peter, James, John and Andrew. Why is this important? Because three of these four were with Jesus when he was transfigured. Those three were Peter, James and John. These three seemed to be Jesus' inner circle of the twelve.

The reason this is important is because I believe that Peter gives us an insight into how the disciples understood this idea of Parousia. I believe it is obvious that the idea behind, Parousia, held a very particular meaning for the disciples. It could not have meant just Jesus’ mere physical presence, for he was already present and living with them. So there is something else going on here, and as I said, I think Peter gives us the answer.

2Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

Peter is writing his farewell letter to those communities of faith in Christ, before he must “put off this my tabernacle,” or as he literally says, he must make his exodus. He wants them to know and be assured that the truths they have been taught and were entrusted with are not “cleverly devised fables,” (compared with what comprised Pharisaic Rabbinic tradition) but that the apostles were eyewitnesses to the life and teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.

As part of this eyewitness testimony, he reminds them that he was with Jesus on that holy mount of Transfiguration, “when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Peter describes this experience as witnessing the power and coming [parousia] of our Lord Jesus Christ. If we allow this instance of parousia to be translated as its true meaning demands, I believe this will make much more sense. Even the Latin Vulgate has “virtutem et praesentiam,” which translates as power and presence.

Peter made known unto them, “the power and presence of our Lord Jesus Christ.” What is important here, is that Peter equates this power and presence, with His Majesty. Majesty is defined as mighty power, splendor, glory. The power here is the Greek word, δύναμις - dunamis, from which we get our word ‘dynamite.’ Contrary to what you might have heard, this word, dynamis, does not mean explosive power. The nature of this power is inherent power, i.e., power residing in a thing by virtue of its nature.

So what is Peter telling us? He is describing the transfiguration event as a demonstration, a brief taste of the Majesty of the Lord Jesus. His Majesty is the visible expression of His Inherent Power and Established Presence. How was this Majesty seen by Peter?

Matthew 17:1-3, 5-6 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,
2 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
3 And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.

Transfiguration is the Greek word, metamorphose, from which we get the word, 'metamorphosis'. Metamorphose means to change into another form. Jesus changed into a different form than he usually had. This changed form was, “his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.” This was not His normal human form, which was that of a servant. We should also note that the transfiguration event is not a fulfillment of Matt. 16:28.

Luke 9:29 describes the transfiguration in this way,

And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering.

This description of Luke is very near how John describe Jesus in the first chapter of Revelation (Rev. 1:10-17). The term white means, brilliant, and glistering means, to flash out like lightning. He was attended on the mount with Moses and Elijah, representing the Law and the Prophets respectively. Yet a voice from heaven announced,

“This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him.”

The Father’s Voice from heaven witnessed to those disciples present, that even though they have the Law and Prophets represented in their midst, the words and voice of the Son should be heard above them. Hear the Son! Is not this how the writer of the letter to the Hebrews began?

Hebrews 1:1-2 Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets,
2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.

In the past, God spoke to the fathers by the prophets, but now in the last of these days, He has spoken in His Son. His Son is the Full and Final Word which God speaks to man. If a man will hear the words of God, let him hear them in the Son.

Also, Jesus is that Prophet that God told His people He would send. Deut. 18:15, 18-19 states,

15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;
18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

So what does Parousia have to do with the transfiguration of Jesus? The transfiguration was a brief demonstration of the Power and Presence of the Majestic King of Israel. In this case of Peter’s use, it has no application concerning what is called His Second Coming. It has to do with who He is in the very nature of His Person. I believe that it is erroneous to equate Parousia strictly with the idea of His Second Coming alone, although in His Second Appearance (Heb. 9:28) there certainly is a Presence [parousia] to be seen.

Luke gives us more insight on how this Majesty is understood. In Luke 9:42-43, we read,

42 And as he was yet a coming, the devil threw him down, and tare him. And Jesus rebuked the unclean spirit, and healed the child, and delivered him again to his father.
43 And they were all amazed at the mighty power [lit., majesty] of God. But while they wondered every one at all things which Jesus did, he said unto his disciples,
44 Let these sayings sink down into your ears: for the Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men.

This mighty power that they were amazed at, is the same word Peter uses, majesty. This mighty power or majesty of God was seen in the fact that Jesus “rebuked the unclean spirit, and healed the child, and delivered him again to his father.” The Majesty or the Mighty Power of God was seen in the event. At this moment, Jesus’ face did not shine as the sun, or His clothing flash like lightning. But the event revealed the Power and Presence of God. The event revealed who He really was. The coming destruction of the temple would also reveal the Majesty of Christ. It would reveal Him as the Majestic King of Israel, seated at the Right Hand of Power, exercising His Kingly Power and Presence.

So when the disciples asked Jesus about His Parousia, they were asking what would be the sign when He would assume His role as King Messiah, and begin His rule from Jerusalem. While Jesus’ statement about the destruction of the temple would signal to them the end of the Age of the Law, with its sacrifices, ceremonies, and festivals, it would also signal the beginning of something new. It would signal the beginning of the Messianic Reign of Israel’s King from Jerusalem. This was the disciples’ eschatology.

The Biblical scholar, N.T. Wright, comes to the same conclusion concerning the disciples' expectation, when he says,

They had come to Jerusalem expecting Jesus to be enthroned as the rightful king. This would necessarily involve Jesus taking over the authority that the temple symbolized. They were now confronted with the startling news that this taking over of authority would mean the demolition, literal and metaphorical, of the temple…. The disciples now “heard” his prophetic announcement of the destruction of the temple as the announcement, also, of his own vindication; in other words, of his own “coming” … to Jerusalem as the vindicated, rightful king. What the disciples had naturally wanted to know was, when would Jesus actually be installed as king?
(N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, Christian Origins and the Question of God vol. 2 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 342)