TEXT [Commentary]

5. The necessity of alertness (24:36-51; cf. Mark 13:32)

36 “However, no one knows the day or hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself.[*] Only the Father knows.

37 “When the Son of Man returns, it will be like it was in Noah’s day. 38 In those days before the flood, the people were enjoying banquets and parties and weddings right up to the time Noah entered his boat. 39 People didn’t realize what was going to happen until the flood came and swept them all away. That is the way it will be when the Son of Man comes.

40 “Two men will be working together in the field; one will be taken, the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding flour at the mill; one will be taken, the other left.

42 “So you, too, must keep watch! For you don’t know what day your Lord is coming. 43 Understand this: If a homeowner knew exactly when a burglar was coming, he would keep watch and not permit his house to be broken into. 44 You also must be ready all the time, for the Son of Man will come when least expected.

45 “A faithful, sensible servant is one to whom the master can give the responsibility of managing his other household servants and feeding them. 46 If the master returns and finds that the servant has done a good job, there will be a reward. 47 I tell you the truth, the master will put that servant in charge of all he owns. 48 But what if the servant is evil and thinks, ‘My master won’t be back for a while,’ 49 and he begins beating the other servants, partying, and getting drunk? 50 The master will return unannounced and unexpected, 51 and he will cut the servant to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

NOTES

24:36 In 24:32-35, Jesus stressed the nearness of his coming, but in 24:36ff he begins to stress that the time of his coming is unknowable (cf. Mark 13:32). Thus, 24:36 is a “declaration of eschatological ignorance” (Davies and Allison 1997:374).

no one knows the day or hour. This expression is a general time indicator, not a precise expression (7:22; 10:19; 24:42, 44, 50; 25:13; 26:45). The word “day” (hēmera [TG2250, ZG2465]) may imply the eschatological significance of the OT “day of the Lord” (e.g., Isa 2:11-12; 61:2; Jer 30:7-8; 46:10; Ezek 7:10-19; 30:3; Joel 1:15; 2:1-2; 3:14; Amos 5:18-20; Zeph 1:7, 14; Zech 14:1; Mal 3:2; 2 Thess 2:2; 2 Pet 3:10). How the time can be near and yet unknowable is difficult to articulate, but both are taught here.

not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. In stating that no one knows the time of his coming, Jesus went so far as to state that not even the angels or even he himself have this information. Various scribes eliminated the words “or the Son himself” (1 L W f1 syr cop and MSS known to Jerome) in order to eliminate the notion that the Son did not know when he would return. The words, included in early and diverse manuscripts (* B D f13 it and MSS known to Jerome), are certain (for further discussion, see Comfort 2007:[Matt 24:36]).

Only the Father knows. He alone is the one who controls the vicissitudes of human life. He alone can shorten the days of eschatological anguish (24:22), and he alone will bring Jesus back to earth in his own time.

24:37 it will be like it was in Noah’s day. Humans living in the days preceding Jesus’ return will be as unaware of it as Noah’s contemporaries were of the flood (Gen 6:5ff; Isa 54:9; cf. 2 Pet 2:5; 3:6). The timing of God’s judgment in both instances is totally unanticipated.

24:38-39 right up to the time Noah entered his boat. This clause comes from Gen 7:7. Jewish literature of the Second Temple period often portrayed Noah’s generation as notorious sinners (Sir 16:7; Jubilees 20:5-6; 1 Enoch 67:10; 2 Macc 2:4; Josephus Antiquities 1.72-76).

People didn’t realize what was going to happen until the flood came. In Noah’s time, humanity was going about its business as usual (cf. Luke 17:26-30). People were caring for their daily needs and planning for what they perceived to be the future. But despite the preaching of Noah (2 Pet 2:5), they were oblivious to the imminent judgment which threatened them, and they were unexpectedly overtaken by the flood. At that point, their concern for matters such as food and drink and marriage became pathetically superfluous.

24:40-42 one will be taken, the other left. The illustration from the days of Noah is now applied to the days of Jesus’ return (cf. Luke 17:34-35). The twin scenarios of 24:40-41 are expressed as exact parallels. Two men will be in the field, cultivating crops for food and drink, and the return of Jesus will suddenly overtake them, taking one and leaving the other. The same experience will overtake two women grinding grain at home. The prospect of such unexpected events underlines the absolute necessity of alert expectancy of the return of Jesus. Ignorance as to the time of his return must not lead to ambivalence as to the fact of his return, which will cause a sudden separation between those who alertly expect it and those who do not (25:31-46). The NT as a whole makes much of the necessity of watchful preparation for Christ’s return (1 Cor 16:13; 1 Thess 5:6; 1 Pet 5:8; Rev 3:2-3; 16:15). There will be no leisure for repentance.

24:43-44 be ready all the time. The matter of alertness in the face of danger whose timing is unknown is further illustrated with a story (24:43) and its application (24:44). The story is about a thief unexpectedly robbing a house (cf. 6:19-20; 12:29; 1 Thess 5:2; 2 Pet 3:10; Rev 3:3; 16:15). If the head of the house (10:25; 13:27, 52; 20:1, 11; 21:33) had been warned as to the time of the burglary, it could have been prevented (cf. Luke 12:39-40).

the Son of Man will come when least expected. Similarly, Jesus’ disciples do not know when he will return so they must be alert and prepared to meet him. He is coming at an unexpected time.

24:45 A faithful, sensible servant. Another household illustration underlines the necessity of alertness with the positive example of a faithful slave (24:45-47) and the negative example of a wicked slave (24:48-51). This time the unexpected factor is not a burglary but the return of a master who puts his slave in charge of feeding his household while he is away (cf. Luke 12:42-48). The disciples must be like that faithful and sensible slave (cf. 7:24; 10:16; 25:21, 23; 1 Cor 4:2), who is promoted to even greater responsibilities.

24:46 If the master returns and finds that the servant has done a good job, there will be a reward. This rendering obscures the literary form of the verse, which is a beatitude extolling the blessedness of the dependable slave who is found doing his master’s will when the master returns (cf. 5:3-11; 11:6; 13:16; 16:17; Luke 12:38).

24:48-51 An opposite scenario is now described. This time the slave put in charge of the household assumes that his master’s return is a long way off (cf. 25:5). This speaks to the problem of delay in the fulfillment of prophecy (cf. Ezek 12:22; Hab 2:3; 2 Pet 3:4). Instead of faithfully discharging the duties assigned him by the master, the slave treats his fellow slaves violently (cf. 18:28-33) and over-indulges in food and drink (cf. 1 Thess 5:7).

The master will return unannounced and unexpected. The master arrives unexpectedly, catches the evil slave in mid-debauch, and punishes him severely with dismemberment (cf. Luke 12:46).

assign him a place with the hypocrites. This is quite serious as hypocrisy is presented as the most heinous sin in Matthew (cf. 6:2ff; 7:5; 15:7; 22:18; 23:13ff).

weeping and gnashing of teeth. This is a graphic picture of the horror of eschatological doom (cf. 8:12; 13:42, 50; 21:41; 22:13; 25:30, 41, 46). To avoid such a terrifying fate, one must be constantly obedient to the master because one does not know when he will arrive (24:36, 39, 42, 44; 25:13). Compare the solemn exhortation of Luke 21:34-36.

COMMENTARY [Text]

In Matthew 24:36-51, Jesus continues the parabolic and paraenetic (or hortatory) emphasis that began in 24:32. This passage has three parts, the first stressing that the time of Jesus’ return is unknowable (24:36-42), the second that disciples must be ready for an unexpected appearance of Jesus (24:43-44), and the third that disciples must faithfully obey their master until he returns (24:45-51). The first part draws an analogy between the days of Noah and the last days (cf. 2 Pet 3:3-7), warning against a preoccupation with daily life that does not take imminent divine judgment into account. Instead, alertness is necessary (24:42). The second part speaks parabolically of a homeowner who does not know that his home is about to be burglarized. The disciples are implicitly told not to emulate the homeowner but to be prepared for the unexpected return of Jesus (24:44). The third part continues the parabolic imagery with the master of a household entrusting his slave with a duty to perform during his absence. Two hypothetical scenarios are laid out, the first involving a good slave who is rewarded for his faithfulness (24:47), the second an evil slave whose profligate behavior warrants the master’s wrath (24:50-51). This imagery warns disciples not to deceive themselves into a sinful lifestyle with the notion that Jesus will not return for a long time. All three parts of the passage stress the necessity of Jesus’ followers being alert, prepared, and busy with their master’s business until his return. Matthew 25 will continue with this parabolic and paraenetic emphasis.

The teaching that Jesus’ return will be unexpected exposes the folly of those whose eschatological alertness rises and falls with the latest news from around the world. There are those “dispen-sensationalists,” whose notion of prophecy leads them into a constant scrutiny of world events, especially the latest events in the Middle East, in a near frantic search of supposed prophetic fulfillments that signal the end of the world. Those of this ilk evidently are under the impression that thieves attempt to burglarize homes when the owners are at home with all the lights and the electronic alarm turned on. Their voices wax and wane in direct proportion to the degree of tension between Israel and the Palestinians. But according to Jesus, moments of increased world tensions would be less likely to portend Christ’s return than moments of relative prosperity and tranquility (1 Thess 5:1-3). In any event, the disciples of Jesus must constantly be about the master’s business, vigilantly awaiting his return. The correctness of one’s eschatology is ultimately a matter of one’s ethics, not one’s speculation.

The Christology of Matthew 24:36. It may be surprising for those who hold to the classical, orthodox doctrine of the Trinity and who, as a result, have a high view of Jesus to learn from this text that he claimed not to know the time of his return to earth. But this text, as well as its parallel in Mark 13:32 and Jesus’ later comment to his disciples in Acts 1:7, all make the common point that the Father alone keeps this detail in his own inscrutable counsel. How this is possible, in light of the pre- existence and deity of Jesus, is not easily explained. However, it is clear that the incarnation of Jesus involved limitation of the use of his divine attributes (Phil 2:6-8; Gundry 1994:492). As a human being, Jesus became hungry and thirsty and tired (e.g., 4:2; 21:18; John 4:6; 19:28). He was empowered by the Spirit of God for his ministry and his miracles (3:16; 4:1; 12:18, 28; cf. Luke 3:22; 4:1, 14, 18; John 1:32; 3:34; Acts 10:38). After the temptation, he was in need of ministry from angels (4:11; cf. Luke 22:43). As he contemplated returning to the Father, he asked for the restoration of his glorious preincarnate prerogatives (John 17:1-5). Evangelical Christians are understandably concerned about this text, but they must recognize its emphasis of the genuine humanity of Jesus, whom Paul affirmed to be the man who was the sole mediator between God and humanity (1 Tim 2:5). For a helpful study of the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the life of Jesus, see Hawthorne (1991).

Eschatology. One detail of this passage has come in for extended discussion among evangelicals of a futurist bent. This is the language of separation—in which one is taken and another left at the coming of Jesus (24:40-42). Those who hold to the theory of a pre-tribulational rapture of the church, distinct from the return of Jesus to the earth after the tribulation (24:29), debate whether 24:40-42 speaks of the rapture taking believers from the earth and leaving unbelievers. The difficulty in coming to a conclusion on this matter is twofold. First, Jesus did not speak here in terms that approximate the distinction between a pre-tribulational rapture and a post-tribulational coming to the earth, as Paul arguably does (compare 1 Thess 4:13-18 with 2 Thess 1:6-10). Second, the language of one being taken and another left is ambiguous. On the analogy of the flood of Noah, those taken were swept away by the flood, and those who were left were protected in the ark (24:38-39; cf. 13:41). But the imagery of 24:31 seems to involve the taking or gathering of God’s chosen ones, not those about to be judged (cf. 3:12). The better part of wisdom on this question is to regard it as an unanswerable diversion from the message of the passage, which is to stress alertness (24:42-44; Carson 1984:509). Ironically, it is possible in cases like this for exegesis to degenerate into a pedantry that distracts the student from the teaching of the passage. Intellectual debate over the intricacies of a text must not occur at the expense of obedience to its ethical directives.