“PAROUSIA,” OR PRESENCE OF CHRIST.
We were surprised to see in a Christian periodical which stands unusually loyal to God’s Word respecting the Sabbath, the following concerning Christ’s coming, based on the remark of a correspondent:— It is true, as L. M. C. suggests, that the first and fundamental meaning of Parousia is presence, and but for the influence of the Jewish theories our earlier English translators would have translated by “presence” instead of “coming.” This would have gone far toward a solution of the question. We suggest a thought or two for those who desire to investigate the question. 1. The conversation recorded in the 25th of Matthew as to the general judgment, the destruction of Jerusalem, etc., was intensely Jewish. In it we get glimpses of discussions which were natural whenever the question of Christ’s kingdom was considered. Probably this should be interpreted as relating to the end of the world, but not to what is usually spoken of in the New Testament as the “presence” of Christ. That is a non-material, that is, a spiritual presence and power. Christ teaches this in Luke 17:21, 22. 2. Whatever may be the full truth, it is certain that up to this time the theories as to the manner and the time of Christ’s presence have been, mainly, a reproduction or a continuation of the Jewish Apocalyptic ideas which preceded His birth, and which gave the apostles such imperfect views of His coming and kingdom. But was the teaching of Christ “intensely Jewish”? Are the teachings of the apostles and of the prophets “intensely Jewish”? And if so in respect to His coming, are they not equally so in respect to His day? If the apostles held “such imperfect views of His coming,” views which they give us in the New Testament, have we any reason to believe that they held any less “imperfect,” “intensely Jewish” views respecting the law and the Sabbath? For, mark it, this criticism above quoted comes not against “views” which Jesus rebuked and corrected, because Adventists do not base their belief on these, but upon the Word of God as given through prophet and apostle. The criticism of our esteemed contemporary is against the Word of God, and if sound, would as truly militate against every doctrine of that Word, all of which came to us through Jews. But parousia means “presence,” not “spiritual presence,” but personal presence, as the reader may readily learn by noting its use in the Word of God. It occurs and is rendered “coming” in the following passages: Matt. 24:3, 27, 37, 39; 1 Cor. 15:23; 16:17; 2 Cor. 7:6, 7; 1 Thess. 4:15; Phil. 1:26; 1 Thess. 2:19; 3:13; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:1, 8, 9; James 5:7, 8; 2 Peter 1:16; 3:4, 12; 1 John 2:28. It is rendered “presence” in 2 Cor. 10:10 and Phil. 2:12. The above references, if we mistake not, give every instance where the Greek word parousia occurs in the New Testament. In not one instance is the idea of personal presence forbidden. In many of these instances it could mean nothing else. The conclusion is therefore unavoidable that in all cases it should be given the obvious meaning of “personal presence.” Take, for instance: “The coming [parousia] of Stephanas and Fortunatus” (1 Cor. 16:17); “Comforted us by the coming [parousia] of Titus” (2 Cor. 7:6). No one will for a moment contend that this meant anything else than the personal, bodily, physical presence of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Titus, in whose coming (parousia) Paul was “glad” and “comforted.” So also the parousia of Jesus Christ means His bodily, personal presence; for “the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven.” “This same Jesus” is coming again.