"Ye Shall Not See It"

Jesus forewarned his disciples that they would not
see even one of the days of the Son of Man.


Luke 17:20-30

20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
22 And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it.
23 And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there: go not after them, nor follow them.
24 For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.
25 But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation.
26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

 

In the above passage, please especially note verse 22: 

"And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and ye shall not see it."

What did Jesus mean by these words? That the time would come when the disciples would long for the "good old days" when Jesus walked among them, but they would not see them again? That's what I used to think, until I noticed that just four verses down in this passage, Jesus uses the term "days of the son of man" to refer to his second coming, not his first:

 "And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man." 

Whenever the meaning of an expression is defined by it's usage in nearby verses, especially in the same discussion, it's best to use that definition when interpreting it. To do otherwise is bad hermeneutics. Note, as well, that the term "days of" is used in this passage to refer to one's visible presence on earth: 

26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.

28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;

This indicates that the term "days of the Son of Man" refers to a time when Jesus will visibly return to Earth.

Someone might object, "What about the Kingdom coming without observation in verse 20? Doesn't that indicate that Jesus will not return visibly?" Not at all. Jesus answered the demands of the Pharisees by pointing out that during the present time, the kingdom advances not by outward physical force, but within the hearts of men. The word "cometh" in verse 20 is in the present tense, indicating how the kingdom of God is CURRENTLY advancing. However, He further clarifies to his disciples in verse 24, "For as the lightning that lighteneth one part under heaven shineth unto the other part under heaven, so shall also the Son of Man be in His day." The word "be" here is in the future tense, indicating how the kingdom will come at a future time. At that time it will be visible. If lightening lighting up the whole sky doesn't indicate extreme visibility, I don't know what does. That's how the Son of Man will be in His day. "Every eye shall see Him".

But wait a second! If "days of the Son of Man" refers to the second coming, what was Jesus telling his disciples? That in the future, they would not see even one of the days of the Son of Man! How depressing that statement must have been to them! At least they were warned of what to expect in advance by our Lord.

I can hear someone objecting, "Jesus meant that they will not see one of the days of the son of man during those days." 

But we must ask, "During those days of what?" Of desiring to see one of the days of the Son of Man!  Just how long do you suppose those days of desiring to see the revealing of Christ lasted? Surely, after Christ's ascension, the disciples longed to see Christ again for the rest of their lives! We see evidence of this throughout the book of Acts and the epistles. The disciples were constantly longing for the return of Christ, and encouraging believers to be ready for it. Although Jesus had prepared the twelve by saying, "ye shall not see it," the twelve still would have encouraged Christians to be ready for His coming, since for all they knew, He might return shortly after their deaths. And living in constant threat of death as they did, they knew that they could depart this earth at any time. 

The second problem with the idea of Jesus implying, "ye shall not see it during those days," is that he simply did not say it that way. He merely said, "ye shall not see it." He added no qualifications. The words have such a force and finality to them that it reminds me of the last verse of that old song by Jimmy Webb, By the time I get to Phoenix:

By the time I make Oklahoma she'll be sleepin'
She'll turn softly and call my name out loud
And she'll cry just to think I'd really leave her
Tho' time and time I try to tell her so
She just didn't know I would really go.

Apparently, the singer really meant what he told that poor woman. Jesus really meant what he is told his disciples, here, too. The fact that Jesus plainly told the twelve, "Ye shall not see it" ought to shake up full preterists, who believe that Jesus returned in 70 AD. The apostle John was still alive in 70 AD, so if Jesus returned then, John saw one of the days of the Son of Man, and had his desire fulfilled.

But didn't Jesus tell his disciples that he would
return within their lifetimes in Luke 9:23-28?

Luke 9: 23 And He said to them all, "If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily, and follow Me.
24 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever will lose his life for My sake, the same shall save it.
25 For what is a man advantaged if he gain the whole world, and lose himself or be cast away?
26 For whosoever shall be ashamed of Me and of My words, of him shall the Son of Man be ashamed when He shall come in His own glory and in His Father's and of the holy angels.
27 But I tell you in truth, there are some standing here that shall not taste of death till they see the Kingdom of God."
28 And it came to pass about eight days after these sayings, He took Peter and John and James, and went up onto a mountain to pray.

In verse 27, does seeing the Kingdom of God refer to seeing Jesus coming in glory, mentioned in verse 26? Or does it refer to the mount of transfiguration event? Bill Grimes has done an excellent job of answering this question in his article, Matthew 16:28 -  A Time Statement For What?, but I would like to contribute an additional observation:

One of the keys to understanding how to group these verses lies in the conjunctions which precede them. Notice that verses 24 - 26 begin with "for," meaning that they go with the preceding verses. The idea behind it is, "take up your cross and follow me, because if you try to gain your life, you will lose it when I return and judge you." Verse 27, however, begins with 'but I tell" (lego de), meaning that it stands in contrast to the preceding verses.

Why would Jesus have begun verse 27 with the words "lego de" (but I tell) if seeing the kingdom of God during the disciple's lifetimes was synonymous with His second parousia? If that were the case, it would have been much more logical for him to have begun that verse with 'for,' as in the preceding verses. Rather, he contrasted it with the preceding verses. As Bill has pointed out in the article referred to above, this idea is further supported by the fact that the word parousia was used by the apostle Peter to refer to the the first coming of Jesus. When Jesus walked the earth, his disciples saw Him coming in power:

16 ¶ For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming [parousia] 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.

Peter associates this coming of the kingdom with power primarily with the mount of transfiguration event, but it was not limited to that:

Matthew 12:28 But if I cast out the demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come on you.
Luke 10:9 And heal the sick in it, and say to them, The kingdom of God has drawn near to you.
Luke 10:11 Even the dust clinging to us out of your city, we shake off against you! Yet know this, that the kingdom of God has drawn near to you!

To learn more about this, please read Bill's article.

But didn't Jesus say "this generation will not pass away
before all of these things take place" in Matthew 24:34?

Yes, but the question is, which generation was Jesus referring to? The generation He was talking to, or the generation He was talking about? There is very convincing linguistic evidence that Jesus was referring to the generation he was talking about. For more information regarding this, see the chapter entitled "What Does 'This Generation' Mean?" in A Scriptural Critique of Full Preterism.

Conclusion

Jesus told his disciples that they would not see even one of the days of the Son of Man. When Luke 9:27 and Matthew 24:34 are interpreted according to sound grammatical and hermeneutic principles, we see that they do not contradict this statement at all.

Rusty Entrekin

Copyright 2001, Marshall "Rusty" Entrekin" This article may be reproduced and distributed freely, provided this copyright notice remains intact and the contents remain complete and unaltered.