article29

§24 Eschatological Discourse (Matt. 24:1–51)

24:1–2 / In Matthew’s Gospel the first two verses of chapter 24 are closely related to the last two verses of chapter 23. Jesus had said, “Your house is left to you desolate” (23:38) and now adds that not one stone of the temple will be left on another (24:2), Mark’s intervening account of the widow’s gift (Mark 12:41–44) is omitted. As Jesus was walking away from the temple (hieron, the entire complex), his disciples called attention to the buildings. In 20–19 B.C. Herod the Great obtained permission from his subjects and began to rebuild the temple of Zerubbabel. An architectural masterpiece, it was fully completed only a few years before its destruction by Titus in A.D. 70.

Jesus responded with the prediction that the buildings would be brought to ruin. Not a single stone would be left intact. Critics who think that the bulk of Matthew comes from the early church rather than from Jesus himself are hard pressed to explain why there is no mention at this point of the burning of the temple. A vaticinium ex eventu (prophecy after the event) would not have omitted such a specific item.

The remainder of chapter 24 is notably difficult. The essential problem is that Matthew seems to move back and forth between an impending crisis (the fall of Jerusalem) and the end of the age, when Jesus would return in judgment. If Jesus held that these two events were contemporaneous, then history has proven him wrong. On the other hand, if we accept the theory of the “Little Apocalypse” (that an apocalyptic pamphlet circulated during difficult days was wrongly attributed to Jesus), we can no longer hold to the dominical origin of the teaching. One helpful insight notes that verses 15–35 answer the disciples’ question, “When will this happen?” (v. 3a), and the remaining verses of the chapter respond in a general way to the second question, “What will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age? (v. 3b., cf. Tasker, pp. 223–31; esp. p. 228, note on v. 3).

It is helpful to remember that apocalyptic literature is a genre that does not share our Western concern for orderly continuity. If we allow Matthew the freedom to enlarge on a specific discourse delivered by Jesus by adding related material from other settings, we are not at all surprised to find the chapter as fluid as it appears. It is not uncommon for prophetic material to move between type and antitype without calling attention to exactly what is happening. Predictions of the future were of necessity couched in language taken from the prophet’s own setting. The coming destruction of Jerusalem was an anticipation of the end of the age. The same essential principles are in play. To speak of the end of history in terms taken from the impending crisis was quite natural. A parallel situation in Revelation pictures the final conflict in terms of hostility brought to bear on the church through the powers of the Roman Empire in consort with the religious leaders of the Asian church. The Olivet Discourse (as it is often called) is best understood if we do not press it unduly at points where we may be uncertain about an exact temporal fulfillment. Matthew moves freely between the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the final consummation. Whether or not he understood them to be one and the same is a question that leads away from any helpful understanding of the essential point being made. The discussion that follows is offered from this perspective.

24:3–14 / Jesus’ statement about the temple’s destruction undoubtedly surprised the disciples. They approached him as he was sitting on the Mount of Olives (a setting connected with apocalyptic expectations; cf. Zech. 14:4) and asked two questions: When will this happen? and, “How can we tell when You’re coming back and the world will come to an end?” (Beck). In the Greek text a single article governs both parts of the second question, indicating that they are to be considered as a single unit. The expected “sign” of Jesus’ coming will also herald the consummation. The word parousia (coming) occurs in the Gospels only in this chapter (vv. 3, 27, 37, 39) but is common throughout the rest of the New Testament. It is widely used in nonbiblical texts for the arrival of a person of high status.

Jesus warns his disciples against being led astray by pretenders who will come claiming to be the Messiah (v. 5). However, when they hear of wars, famines, and earthquakes (signs of the approaching end in Jewish apocalyptic), they are not to be alarmed. These are but the “birth-pangs of the new age” (NEB). Theudas and Judas the Galilean (Acts 5:36–7), as well as “the Egyptian who started a revolt” (Acts 21:38), fall into the category of nationalistic messiahs. The followers of Jesus are to beware of those who come claiming to speak with the authority of Christ.

By and large the Pax Romana (scarcely known before Augustus) had put an end to the many conflicts that raged during the Hellenistic period. Apocalyptic writing envisioned a return to the chaos of earlier periods. Famines accompany conflict. Earthquakes are frequently mentioned in Revelation in connection with the end of history (Rev. 6:12; 8:5; 11:13, 19; 16:18). All these things, however, are but the beginning of birth pains (v. 8; Gk. ōdin is used for the “terrors and torments that precede the coming of the Messianic Age,” Str-B., vol. 1, p. 950).

When all these things begin to happen, the faithful will be tortured (handed over eis thlipsin, v. 9) and put to death by a pagan society that despises those who honor the name of Christ (cf. Dan. 12:1). At the same time many will deny their faith and vent their hatred by turning on one another. False prophets will arise to confuse the issue even further (cf. Acts 20:29–30). With the spread of wickedness, the love of most (tōn pollōn in v. 12 probably means “of the majority”) will grow cold. But those who stand firm to the end will be saved. The gospel of the kingdom is to be proclaimed throughout the entire inhabited earth (oikoumenē), so that all nations may hear the truth, and “only after that will the end come” (Knox). Only when the church has completed its worldwide mission of evangelization will the Parousia no longer be delayed.

24:15 / Jesus predicts that a time of extreme trouble will be heralded by the appearance of the “abomination of desolation” (AV) standing in the holy place. The background for this “abomination that causes desolation” (RSV calls it “the desolating sacrilege,” and TCNT translates “the Foul Desecration”) is Daniel’s prophecy of the “seventy ‘sevens’ ” (Dan. 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). The reference is to the pagan altar to the Olympian Zeus that Antiochus IV Epiphanes (ruler of the Seleucid Empire) erected in the temple court in Jerusalem (1 Macc. 1:54). Among the many things he did in his attempt to defame Judaism was a directive to “sacrifice swine and unclean animals” (1 Macc. 1:47) in the temple (cf. 2 Mace. 6:1–11).

A comparison of the synoptic accounts reveals interesting differences. Mark (13:14) uses a masculine participle for “standing” (hestēkota), although it modifies the neuter word “abomination” (bdelygma). This would indicate that he understood the critical phrase as referring to a person. Some have thought that Mark may have been alluding to the abortive attempt of Caligula (Gaius Caesar, A.D. 12–41) to have his statue set up in the Holy of Holies. The cryptic “let the reader understand” (Mark 13:14) is used in support of this conjecture. Matthew changes the masculine participle to neuter (hestos) and, instead of Mark’s “where it ought not to be,” substitutes in the holy place. Luke says that the desolation is near when they see Jerusalem surrounded by armies (Luke 21:20). This would seem to indicate (but not demand) that Luke understood the section in terms of the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

Tasker holds that the clue for understanding the passage is found in Luke. He concludes that “the ‘abominable sign’ would most naturally refer to the ensign carried by the Roman soldiers, to which the image of the emperor was attached” (p. 229). However, because of the verses that follow (specifically the mention in v. 21 of the suffering of this period that will never again be equaled), it is unwise to limit the interpretation to a specific time in history past. A more satisfactory answer to the identification of the “abomination of desolation” is to find its origin in that critical period that gave rise to the Maccabean revolution, and then to understand that it has surfaced in history whenever the purposes of God have been violently assaulted by the forces of evil and will assume a personal embodiment in the Antichrist of the last days (cf. 2 Thess. 2:1–12; Rev. 13, 17). It is generally agreed that the counsel to let the reader understand (v. 15b) is offered by the Gospel writer. It is like the word in Revelation 13 regarding the number of the beast: “This calls for wisdom: let him who has understanding reckon the number” (v. 18).

24:16–22 / When the “appalling Horror” (Moffatt) appears, then it is time to take flight. Those in Judea are to take refuge in the mountains. Those resting on rooftop terraces should not attempt to save anything below. If a person is working in the field, he must not go back to pick up his coat (Gk. himation here would be an outer cloak laid aside in order to work). It will be especially difficult for pregnant women and nursing mothers. It is hoped the flight will not take place in the rainy season, when the wadis flood and the roads get mired in mud, or on the Sabbath (because travel is severely limited on that day). The distress of that time will be greater than the world has ever known—or will ever know. In fact, if God had not decided to cut short that time of tribulation, no human being would be able to survive. However, for the sake of his own chosen people, the time will be shortened.

The siege and collapse of Jerusalem was a time of enormous suffering. Josephus tells us that over a million inhabitants died, mostly of famine. One particularly grisly account tells of a mother who killed, roasted, and ate her baby (War 6.201–213). The fall of Jerusalem becomes a type of the great and final tribulation that, if God should not intervene, would bring an end to the human race. Verse 22 reflects the Jewish understanding that the events of history are predetermined by God, but that he is free to alter them according to his best judgment.

24:23–28 / The central point in verses 23–28 is that believers are not to be deceived by false prophets who claim to have special information about the whereabouts of the Christ. The coming of the Son of Man (Messiah) will be “as instantaneous and as universal as a flash of lightning” (Tasker, p. 225). Paul speaks of the deceptiveness of the Antichrist (2 Thess. 2:9–11), as does John in the Apocalypse (Rev. 13:13–15). Little wonder, since the first contact of Satan with the primal pair was one of subtlety and deceit. The miracle-working power of false prophets reminds us of the ability of the Egyptian magicians to match the early plagues of Moses (Exod. 7:22; 8:7). The followers of Jesus will not have to depend upon “prophetic voices” to tell them of the arrival of the Parousia! When Christ comes there will be no more doubt about it than there would be about whether or not lightning had just flashed from the east is visible … in the west.

Verse 28 appears to be a proverb added at this point to emphasize the “unmistakable visibility of the Son of Man’s coming” (Gundry, p. 487). Only if we were to limit this section to the fall of Jerusalem would it be reasonable to suggest that the “eagles” are the Roman army (the symbol appeared on the Roman standards) who swoop down on the “corpse” (Jerusalem in its final days). Though aetos normally means “eagle,” here it should be taken as “vulture” (eagles are predatory but do not flock together around a carcass). Schweizer makes the interesting comment that the end of the age was attested even then by the false messiahs and prophets who were converging like vultures (p. 455).

24:29–31 / Immediately after the distress of those days (vv. 4–28, esp. 9–11 and 15–22), there will appear great cosmic disturbances. The language is apocalyptic and draws from Isaiah 13:10 (“The stars of heaven … will not show their light”), Isaiah 34:4 (“All the starry host will fall”), and Haggai 2:6 (“I will once more shake the heavens”). Similar language is used in Revelation when the sixth seal is opened (Rev. 6:12–14). Tasker finds in verses 29–31 a cryptic description of the Roman conquest of Jerusalem and the subsequent spread of the Christian faith (pp. 226–26). It is better to take the passage as setting the stage (by means of the rhetoric of apocalyptic) for the return of the Son of Man. The “heavenly bodies” (v. 29) are sometimes identified as astral divinities, but it is better to take the phrase in a more literal way.

At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky (v. 30). Context would suggest that the sign should be understood as a star or comet. However, the genitive could be construed as an appositive, in which case the sign would be the Son of Man. Some refer back to the messianic passage in Isaiah 11, where the sign (sēmeion, v. 12) is a banner or ensign. Schweizer writes, “Matthew is merely trying to say that the standard of the Messiah will be raised and the trumpet blown when he comes to establish God’s Kingdom” (p. 456). Whatever the exact meaning of sign, the point being made is that the coming of the Son of Man will be clearly visible to all people everywhere.

When the heavenly sign appears, then “all the tribes of the earth” (AV) will beat their breasts as a sign of mourning (v. 30; koptō in the middle voice means “to strike”). Zechariah 12:10ff. pictures the clans of Israel mourning when they look on the one they have pierced (cf. John 19:37 and Rev. 1:7). When the Son of Man returns, the mourning will be universal. All the nations of the earth will realize how irrevocably wrong they have been about the person and messianic claims of Jesus. Not only will all see his return but they will hear the loud trumpet call that announces his arrival. The trumpet was used in ancient Israel to gather God’s people for religious purposes and to signal activities on the battlefield. In speaking of a time yet future when the Israelites will be gathered, Isaiah says that “in that day a great trumpet will sound” (Isa. 27:13). At the sound of the eschatological trumpet (cf. 1 Cor. 15:52; 1 Thess. 4:16), the angels will be sent to the four winds (cf. 13:41, 49) to gather God’s elect (for Old Testament parallels, cf. Zech. 2:6 and Deut. 30:4). The scene depicted is clearly that of the return of Christ at the end of history as we know it.

24:32–35 / The fig tree has a lesson to teach. When its tender shoots appear and begin to open into leaves, then you know that summer is near. In the same way, when you see all the things just described, know that the end is near, right at the door. The fig tree shed its leaves in winter and budded late in spring. Since harvest in Palestine took place in the summer, the budding of the fig tree would indicate that the end (symbolized by harvest) was at hand. All these things, says Jesus, will happen before this generation … will pass away (v. 34). This remarkable statement is more certain than the universe itself. Heaven and earth will pass away but the words of Jesus will stand forever.

The problem is obvious: the generation alive at that time has long since passed away, but the eschatological events described in the passage have not taken place. There have been many suggestions as to how this apparently insoluble problem may be resolved.

First, if the entire discourse is understood as relating to the fall of Jerusalem (Tasker, pp. 223–31) the problem disappears. This answer can be held only by overlooking the rather obvious meaning of a number of verses in the discourse.

Second, Jesus was simply wrong at this point. Doesn’t he, in fact, indicate his limited knowledge in verse 36? Put rather boldly, Beare says, “It must be recognized that the entire apocalyptic framework of early Christian preaching is shattered beyond any hope of rescue” (p. 473). But if the limitation of knowledge mentioned in verse 36 is to be taken as referring to the general time of his return rather than the “actual day and time” (Phillips), why would Jesus contradict himself with the analogy of the budding fig tree?

Third, perhaps the Greek genea (generation) means the Jewish race, or the human race in general, or perhaps the generation alive when the series of final events begins (the establishment of the nation of Israel in 1948?). Green holds that it is a promise that the church will survive to the end (p. 202).

Fourth, if genētai (happened) is taken as an ingressive aorist, the sentence would indicate that before the generation alive at that time had died, all the things described in connection with the end will have started to take place.

Fifth, Hill suggests that we are probably dealing with a “shortening of historical perspective,” which is common in prophecy (p. 323). C. H. Dodd is quoted as saying that “when the profound realities underlying a situation are depicted in the dramatic form of historical prediction, the certainty and inevitability of the spiritual processes involved are expressed in terms of the immediate imminence of the event” (Parables, p. 71). Although this seems reasonable in a somewhat abstract way, it fails to correspond to the certainty Jesus claims for his statement (v. 35).

Sixth, biblical prophecy is capable of multiple fulfillment. In the immediate context, the “abomination of desolation” (v. 15) builds on the defilement of the temple by Antiochus Epiphanes, is repeated when the sacred temple in Jerusalem is destroyed by the Roman army in A.D. 70, and has yet a more complete fulfillment when the eschatological Antichrist exalts himself by taking his seat in the “temple of God” proclaiming himself to be God (2 Thess. 2:3–4). In a similar way, the events of the immediate period leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem portend a greater and more universal catastrophe when Christ returns in judgment at the end of time. Gundry is right in his observation that double fulfillment (I would say “multiple fulfillment”) involves an ambiguity that needs to be accepted as fact rather than objected to on literary grounds (p. 491).

24:36–44 / The discourse began with two questions: the first asked when the temple would be destroyed, and the second, what would be the sign of Jesus’ coming (24:3). The answer to the first is that it will take place in the lifetime of the present generation. The answer to the second is that the events connected with Jesus’ return (vv. 5–29) are like the budding of a fig tree that indicates the arrival of summer. The exact time, however, (that day or hour), is known by no one (not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son), but only by the Father (v. 36). This “pillar passage” (Schmiedel) has long intrigued scholars. It is a candid admission by Jesus of limited knowledge. The omission of oude ho hyios (nor the Son) in a number of manuscripts is undoubtedly the result of theological difficulties caused by the phrase (cf. Metzger, TCGNT, p. 62). Even without the phrase, the difficulty remains, because it is “the Father only” who knows the exact time when the Son will return. As the omnipotence of the Son did not come into play in the temptation scene (4:1–11), now his omniscience is veiled in a specific area. Were this not the case, the incarnation would be something less than a full and genuine entrance into the condition of humanity (cf. Heb. 4:15).

The case of those alive at the time of Noah and living as if a crisis did not exist illustrates what will happen to those who fail to watch for the unexpected return of the Son. Vigilance is in order because no one knows the exact time of the Parousia. Those alive in the days of Noah are not pictured as especially wicked. Absorbed in the daily round of living, they were taken unawares by the flood. So it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. A great separation will take place. The man working in the field (v. 40) and the woman grinding meal (v. 41) will be taken away in judgment (not to safety; cf. parallel in v. 39 with those “taken away” by the flood: Knox says the flood “drowned them all”). The followers of Jesus are to be on the watch because they do not know on what day their Lord will come (v. 42). You can be sure that the head of a house would stay awake if he knew when the thief would arrive and tunnel through (Gk. dioryssō) the wall in order to rob him. In the same way, believers must be ready because the Son of Man will return at an hour when he is least expected.

24:45–51 / Who then is the faithful and wise servant? The paragraph that follows is directed to those appointed to positions of leadership in the church (those responsible to “manage [the] household staff” and “issue … rations at the proper time,” NEB). The wise (or sensible) servant is the one who, when the master returns, will be found to be faithfully carrying out his or her responsibilities. The master will reward such a servant by placing him over the entire estate. The servant who is wicked is the one who is led to believe that the master will be away for a long time and therefore seizes the opportunity to bully fellow servants and spend time carousing with drunkards. Beare notes that “the danger of arrogance developing in religious leaders is not a mediaeval or modern phenomenon” (p. 478). When the master does return unexpectedly, this wicked servant will be cut … to pieces and assigned his fate with the hypocrites, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (cf. 22:13). Dismemberment was a severe punishment but not unknown in the ancient world (cf. Heb. 11:37). Some have suggested that in this context dichotomeō (“to cut in two”) should be taken metaphorically to mean excommunication (i.e., to separate from the community). Others have suggested that it is perhaps a mistranslation of the Aramaic word that means either “give him blows” or “assign him his portion” (cf. Fenton, p. 395). The final sentence in verse 51 (there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth), however, indicates physical death and what awaits the sinner after that.