Mateus 24
Thomas Constable · Citado em PreceptAustin
Mateus 24
Constable comments that "The disciples asked Jesus two questions. The first was, "When will these things be?" The second question had two parts as is clear from the Greek construction of the sentence. It linked two nouns, "coming" (parousia) and "end" (sunteleia), with a single article, "the" (Gr. to), and the conjunction "and" (Gr. kai). What will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?" (Commentary) Blomberg agrees with 2 questions explaining that "By not repeating the definite article ("the") before "end of the age," Matthew's rendering of Jesus' words is most likely linking the coming of Christ and the end of the age together as one event (Granville Sharp's rule)." (BORROW - NAC - Matthew) What is the significance of the fact that there is only one article governing the coming and the consummation (end)? This suggests that the disciples viewed the coming and the consummation as two events which were distinct, but closely connected. This will be discussed more fully below. FIRST QUESTION: WHEN? Tell us, when will these things happen - What are these things? Jesus had just asked "Do you not see all these things? which is a clear reference to the Temple. It follows that their request regarding these things refers to the destruction of the Temple, which He had also foretold in Mt 23:38 declaring "Behold, your house is being left to you desolate!" It is interesting that the disciples did not ask "why" but "when?" One thought is that they understood that judgment had to come on Israel, but we cannot be dogmatic. Matthew 24 and Mark 13 do not record when the Temple would be destroyed, although they do record signs regarding when it would be made desolate (Mt 24:15+, Mk 13:14+). The answer to when the Temple would be destroyed is recorded in Luke 21:20+ where Jesus foretold that "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is at hand." This clear sign would signal the beginning of the end of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple, a prophecy that was literally fulfilled in 70 AD, confirming Jesus as a true prophet, Whose coming had been foretold by Moses in Deuteronomy "The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from among you, from your countrymen, you shall listen to him (SADLY THEY DID NOT LISTEN TO HIM!)." (Dt 18:15, 18+, cf tests of a true prophet - Dt 18:20-22+) Related Resource: Chart Summarizing the Three Signs in the Olivet Discourse D Edmond Hiebert has an interesting analysis of these things - These things again relates to the Temple, but the question (of the disciples) assumes that the destruction will be part of the complex events culminating in the consummation of the age and the inauguration of the messianic kingdom. His prophecy of the destruction of the temple naturally led them to think of Zechariah 14+ and its eschatological portrayal. This implication is more clearly indicated in Matthew's formulation of the question. "When shall these things be, and what is the sign of thy coming and [the] completion of the age?" (Darby). Completion of the age (sunteleia) is the noun form of the verb in Mark, rendered "shall be fulfilled," (sunteleo) denoting that the things mentioned will be brought to their close, or final fulfillment. All (panta) (ED: This refers to the parallel passage in Mk 13:4) stands emphatically at the end of the sentence to stress the total consummation of these crisis events ("to semeion hotan mello tauta sunteleisthai panta"). They were eager to know what sign or visible portent would enable them to recognize the inauguration of these cataclysmic events. Clearly, they did not foresee the long interval between the two events (ED: Some would say "three" events) . The local event (ED: destruction of the Temple) became blended into the eschatological (ED: His parousia and end of the age). This use of the local event in the foreground as the type of eschatological event is seen in the Old Testament in Joel's presentation of the Day of the Lord (ED: E.g., Joel 1:4 describing the local locust plague and the Day of the LORD in Joel 1:15). This prophetic use of the local crisis as a type of the end time teaches us that each age has its own judgment pointing to the certainty of the final judgment. (Ibid) (Bolding added for emphasis) Indeed, if the disciples knew their OT prophecies, Jesus' prophecy regarding the Temple and His subsequent establishment of the Messianic Kingdom would have naturally led them to think of Zechariah 14:1-21+, for Zechariah 14:2+ describes a battle against Jerusalem, Zechariah 14:3,5 describes Messiah's victorious return (cp parousia - arrival and presence) and Zechariah 14:8-21 describes the conditions of the subsequent Messianic Kingdom. A few thoughts to ponder - Remember that in 2023 we read Jesus' prophecies almost 2000 years later and we know that the Temple has been destroyed in 70AD and we know that Jesus has not physically returned to bring this present age to its consummation and inaugurate His Messianic Kingdom. But if we place ourselves in the sandals of these four disciples on the mountain with Jesus, when they asked about the Temple destruction, they did not see a gap of 2000 years between the fulfillment of these prophecies (Temple destroyed, Jesus' arrival, end of this age). In their mind they clearly associated Jesus parousia (presence - see discussion below) and the consummation of the age (and beginning of the next, the Messianic Age). Indeed, from Acts 1:6 their question indicates that they thought the end of this age and the beginning of the Messianic Kingdom was to come soon, probably in their lifetime. After all they were on the same Mount of Olives as they were in Mt 24:3 when Jesus had first disclosed His prophecy. The difference was that now Jesus had been crucified and resurrected, returned to life from the dead. And they understood that truth now. And so here they were on the Mount and Jesus had indeed in one sense returned or "come" to them again (recalling that parousia means an arrival and a presence), this coming of course being from the grave not from clouds. And so one could easily see how they might interpret this as His parousia (arrival and presence) as fulfilled. No, the Temple had not yet been destroyed, but His coming back to life and coming to them would signal that this was the end of the age and soon the Messianic Kingdom would begin. Just a few thoughts to ponder! John MacArthur's sermon on The Signs of Christ's Coming, Part 1 gives a summary of first century Jewish eschatological expectations which helps us "get inside the disciples' heads" and better understand why they were asking Jesus what they asked. In other words, one might think that the mention of the Temple's destruction would generate a question related only to that topic. However they also asked about the coming of Messiah and the consummation of the age. It is clear that in their minds all three were related, but as alluded to above, they had no concept of the gap of time that would separate the Temple's destruction from the coming and consummation. Related Resource: Discussion of Time Gaps in Interpretation of Prophecy. Ray
Mateus 24
Constable: The connection between Jesus being almost at Jerusalem and the kingdom appearing immediately implies that the believers in the crowd expected Jesus to begin the kingdom when He arrived there. Jesus had just told Zaccheus that salvation had come to his house that day (Lk 19:9), but salvation would not come to Israel for some time. Even though the Son of Man had come to seek and to save the lost (Lk 19:10), the national deliverance of Israel would have to wait. What follows (Lk 19:12-27) is another of the many passages in Luke that records Jesus' teaching about the future. (Ed: Quoting Tannehill who adds) "In Luke 19:11 the disciples are pictured as expecting something that should have been and could have been apart from the rejection of Jesus. But because of this rejection, the Messianic Kingdom for Israel does not come immediately, as the disciples mistakenly hoped. We see that in Luke-Acts the problem of eschatological delay is intertwined with the problem of Jewish rejection." (Luke 19 Commentary) Walter L Liefeld - Obviously this parable teaches that Jesus predicted an interval of time between His ascension and return. For the time when the kingdom will be restored to Israel, see the beginning of Luke's second volume (Acts 1:6-7). (Expositor's Bible Commentary, 1984) (3) Acts - It is notable that the very last question the disciples ask Jesus before His ascension was about the timing of the Messianic Kingdom. And so when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, "Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; 8 but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth." (Acts 1:6-8-see commentary on Acts 1:8) Comment: Notice that Jesus did not correct their belief but explained they the timing of "times or epochs" were in the hands of His Father. He did teach them that they had another mission which was to carry the Gospel to ends of the world. There is little doubt that some 40+ days earlier the disciples' question in Matthew 24:3 reflected their belief that Jesus was about to set up His earthly Messianic Kingdom. ESV Study Bible: The place of the disciples' assembly was the Mount of Olives (Acts 1:12), at the foot of which lay Bethany (Luke 24:50). The disciples asked Jesus when He would restore the kingdom to Israel because they concluded from His resurrection and the promise of the Spirit that the Messianic era had dawned and the final salvation of Israel was imminent. However, they were probably still expecting the restoration of a military and political kingdom that would drive out the Roman armies and restore national sovereignty to Israel, as had happened numerous times in the OT. Jesus corrected them, not by rejecting the question, but by telling them (Acts 1:8) that they would receive power from the Holy Spirit, not in order to triumph over Roman armies but to spread the good news of the gospel throughout the world. In other words, the return is in God's timing; in the meantime, there are other key things believers are to do. (ESV Study Bible BORROW) Thomas Constable adds: The Old Testament associated Spirit baptism (Ed: Just promised by Jesus in Acts 1:5) with the beginning of the Messianic (millennial) kingdom (Isaiah 32:15-20; Isaiah 44:3-5; Ezekiel 39:28-29; Joel 2:28-32, 3:1; Zechariah 12:8-10). It was natural therefore that the disciples would ask if that kingdom was about to begin in view of Jesus' promise that the Spirit would baptize them in a few days (cf Lk 24:49). "This time" refers to "not many days from now" (Acts 1:5). In the Septuagint, the term "restoration" (Greek apokathistemi) technically refers to God's political restoration of Israel (Psalm 16:5; Jer 15:19; Jer 16:15; Jer 23:8; Ezek 16:55; Ezek 17:23; Hos 11:11). [Note: J. Carroll, Response to the End of History - borrow, p. 146, footnote 124.] The Gentiles had taken the Jews' kingdom from them dating from Nebuchadnezzar's conquest in 586 B.C. Clearly the messianic kingdom is in view here. [Note: See Darrell L. Bock, "Evidence from Acts," in A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 187-88 - borrow; and Ladd, p. 1125.] "In the book of Acts, both Israel and the church exist simultaneously. The term Israel is used twenty times and ekklesia (church) nineteen times, yet the two groups are always kept distinct." (Acts 1 Commentary) Richard Longenecker - The question the disciples asked reflects the embers of a once blazing hope for a political theocracy in which they would be leaders (cf. Mark 9:33-34; 10:35-41; Luke 22:24). Now the embers are fanned by Jesus' talk of the coming Holy Spirit. In Jewish expectations, the restoration of Israel's fortunes would be marked by the revived activity of God's Spirit, which had been withheld since the last of the prophets. But though his words about the Spirit's coming rekindled in the disciples their old nationalistic hopes, Jesus had something else in mind. (Expositor's Bible Commentary, 1984) (4) Daniel - It is possible the disciples were familiar with Daniel's prophecies, including the prophecy in Daniel 2 which clearly linked Jesus' Second Coming (symbolized by the Stone) with the end of this age (The Stone will crush the statue representative of Gentile powers and Gentile dominion will come to an end when the Stone comes!) and the establishment of His Messianic Kingdom. "You continued looking until a Stone was cut out without hands (the supernatural Stone = Jesus - Ps 118:22, 1Pe 2:4-8), and it struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay, and crushed them. 35"Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed all at the same time, and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain (symbolizes a "kingdom" - cp Da 2:44) and filled the whole earth. (Da 2:34-35-Commentary) "And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever. 45 "Inasmuch as you saw that a Stone was cut out of the mountain without hands and that it crushed the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold, the great God has made known to the king what will take place in the future; so the dream is true, and its interpretation is trustworthy." (Da 2:44-45-Commentary) Comment: The Stone symbolizes Christ Who at His return will put an end to Gentile dominion (symbolized by the crushing of the statute), thus bringing an end to this age, at which time God will set up His Kingdom which will fill the whole earth. We see the same truth taught in Daniel 7:13-14+ where the Son of Man is given a Kingdom. (Quoted by Jesus as the "sign" of His coming in Mt 24:30; cf the same pattern of the end of the age and of Gentile rule and the beginning of the next age, the Messianic Kingdom in Da 7:26-27+) The sign (semeion) - Earlier Jesus has referred to the scribes and Pharisees who had asked for "a sign" as "an evil and adulterous generation." (Mt 12:38-39, cp Mt 16:1-4). He did not rebuke the disciples' request for a sign, for their request was not a manifestation of unbelief but of belief. They believed He was coming again and His coming would be associated with the end of the age. They wanted a warning sign regarding the coming events which they clearly believed would soon come to pass. The parallel passage in Mark 13:4 reads "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are going to be fulfilled? THREE SURE SIGNS Below are the three questions (or two questions with the second having two parts) and the signs that signify they are about to take place. Notice that Matthew and Mark do not record the disciples asking Jesus for a sign regarding the destruction of the Temple. However, Luke 21:6-7 records "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down." And they questioned Him, saying, "Teacher, when therefore will these things be? And what will be the sign when these things (What things? Lk 21:6 in context = utter destruction of the Temple) are about to take place?"" Note that the sign in Luke 21:20 is not the same as the sign in Mt 24:15. They are clearly distinctly different signs and to attempt to say they are identical signs is an example of not letting the plain sense of the Scriptures say what they say. The result of course will be an incorrect interpretation. To reiterate, Matthew 24 is indeed a difficult prophecy but the three signs are not difficult to identify unless one comes to the text with a preconceived bias or a desire to make Jesus' words fit one's particular system of theological interpretation. And if one fails to read the text literally, a difficult prophecy becomes even more difficult to accurately interpret! THREE SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS** THREE SURE SIGNS The Prophetic Event The Sign The Timing The Scripture (1) Desolation of Jerusalem Destruction of Temple WHEN YOU SEE... Jerusalem Surrounded by Armies Fulfilled 70 AD Luke 21:20+ (2) The End of the Age WHEN YOU SEE... Abomination of Desolation Standing in the Holy Place Yet Future Matthew 24:15 (3) The Second Coming THE SIGN... The Son of Man Coming in the clouds Yet Future Matthew 24:30 ** Events (2) and (3) are linked because the Second Coming marks the "end of the age" thus many writers say the disciples asked only two questions, the second having two components. Sign (4592)(semeion akin to semaino = to give a sign; sema = a sign) is a distinguishing mark by which something is known, an object, quality, or event whose presence or occurrence indicates the probable presence or occurrence of something else. Semeion has a basic meaning of something that serves as a pointer to aid perception or insight. A sign directs attention away from its unusual nature to the meaning and the significance it points to. In Scripture when semeion used of God's miraculous works (that which is contrary to the usual course of nature) it points to spiritual truth. It speaks of outward compelling proof of divine authority. Early in its use this word meant a visible sign which someone saw. For instance, when Constantine was embroiled in battle he saw the sign of a cross and the words, "In this sign conquer." This turned him to Christianity, and he granted toleration to the Christians in 313. Hiebert says signs "are finger posts to a higher reality." Semeion can be a sign, a mark, a token, or a miracle with a spiritual end purpose. In other words a sign can be either natural or supernatural. A sign is an object, quality, or event whose presence or occurrence indicates the probable presence or occurrence of something else. Swindoll writes that "Ancient peoples often viewed "signs" in the sky, such as lightning or eclipses, as omens of terrible things to come (Matt. 16:3). The term sēmeion could also refer to miraculous feats that pointed to a person's supernatural origin or authority (Mt 12:38). In Revelation the term is used to indicate amazing symbolic visions that point to epochal events (Rev. 12:1, 3), but it also refers to false wonders and miracles used by Satan to turn people away from God (Rev 13:13-14)." (See Insights on Revelation) Semeion in Matthew - Matt. 12:38; Matt. 12:39; Matt. 16:1; Matt. 16:3; Matt. 16:4; Matt. 24:3; Matt. 24:24; Matt. 24:30; Matt. 26:48 The End (Consummation) (4930)(sunteleia from sun = together or an intensifier + teleo = to finish) describes the bringing of something to a successful finish. In a word the noun sunteleia means completion, conclusion, close, end, consummation. It is used 5 times by Jesus Himself in the phrase the "end of the age." (Mt 13:39, 40, 49, 24:3, 28:20). The only other NT use is by the writer of Hebrews who describes "the consummation of the ages." (Heb 9:26). Sunteleia describes the time when several things coincide so as to reach their climax during the same period. The end - This phrase occurs 9x/9v in Matthew's Gospel and 4 of the uses are in Matthew 24 (Mt 24:3, 6, 13, 14). Five times Matthew uses the specific phrase "the end of the age" and every time the noun for "end" is sunteleia. In the other 4 occurrences of "the end" the noun for "end" is telos. Here are all the uses of the end in Matthew...note not all are sunteleia... Matthew 10:22+ "You will be hated by all because of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end (telos) who will be saved (SPIRITUAL SALVATION). Matthew 13:39+ and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end (sunteleia) of the age (aion) ; and the reapers are angels. Matthew 13:40+ "So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end (sunteleia) of the age (aion). Matthew 13:49+ "So it will be at the end (sunteleia) of the age (aion); the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous, ESV Study Bible (BORROW): The judgment that will follow the Son of Man's return at the close of the age to establish His kingdom in its fully realized form. (Bolding added for emphasis). COMMENT - Notice how this note rightly connects Christ's coming with the consummation of this age and commencement of His Kingdom. Matthew 24:3 As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end (sunteleia) of the age (aion)?" Matthew 24:6 "You will be hearing of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not frightened, for those things must take place, but that is not yet the end (telos). Matthew 24:13 "But the one who endures to the end (telos), he will be saved. (SPIRITUAL SALVATION) Matthew 24:14 "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end (telos) will come. Matthew 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end (sunteleia) of the age (aion)." Of the Age (165)(aion) usually refers to some aspect of time past, present or future depending on the context: (1) as a segment of contemporary time = lifetime (1Ti 6:17), present age (Lk 16.8, 20:34 = "sons of this age", 1Cor 3:18, 1Cor 1:20, Titus 2:12 = "live....godly in this present age;" Mt 12:32, Mt 13:22 = "cares of this present age" = also in Mk 4:19; 2Ti 4:8 and Ro 12:2 = "this world" = this present age and its ungodly thoughts and actions; 2Cor 4:4 = "god of this world" = of this present age; The end of this period = Mt 13:39-40, 49, Mt 24:3, 28:20); (2) of time gone by past, earliest times (Lk 1.70); (3) of prolonged and unlimited time = eternity (1Ti 1.17); (4) of time to come eternity = age to come (Lk 20.35, BDAG says "the age to come" corresponds to "the Messianic period"); idiomatically (with preposition eis = into) literally into the age = forever, eternally (JN 6.51); In another idiom aion means literally into the ages of the ages = forever and ever, forevermore (Heb 1.8); (5) plural, as a spatial concept, of the creation as having a beginning and moving forward through long but limited time = universe, world (Heb 1.2; 9.26; 11.3) Aion - uses in Matthew - Matt. 6:13; Matt. 12:32; Matt. 13:22; Matt. 13:39; Matt. 13:40; Matt. 13:49; Matt. 21:19; Matt. 24:3; Matt. 28:20 Matthew 24:4 And Jesus answered and said to them, "See to it that no one misleads you: kai apokritheis (APPMSN) o Iesous eipen (3SAAI) autois blepete (2PPAM) me tis humas planese (3SAAS): CLICK FOR >60 ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THIS VERSE Jer 29:8 Mk 13:5,6,22 Lu 21:8 2Co 11:13-15 Eph 4:14 Eph 5:6 Col 2:8,18 2Th 2:3 2Pe 2:1-3 1Jn 4:1 Matthew 24 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries Related Passages: Jeremiah 29:8 “For thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel, ‘Do not let your prophets who are in your midst and your diviners deceive you, and do not listen to the dreams which they dream. 2 Corinthians 11:13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. Ephesians 4:14 As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; Ephesians 5:6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. JESUS BEGINS TO ANSWER THE DISCIPLES' QUESTIONS This passage marks the beginning of Jesus' formal Olivet Discourse, a teaching which is also found in Mark 13 and Luke 21. The Discourse is longest in Matthew (Mt 24:1-25:46). Note that Jesus does not answer their question about the destruction of the Temple in Matthew 24 or Mark 13 but He does answer it in Luke 21:20-24+. As Hiebert says "Instead of giving them the sign they had requested, Jesus began by alerting them to false signs." John MacArthur "The answer Jesus gave is the longest answer (ED: 97 verses in Mt 24-25) given to any question asked in the New Testament, and its truths are absolutely essential for understanding His return and the amazing events associated with it. It is the revelation of our Lord, directly from His own lips, about His return to earth in glory and power (Mt 24:30)." (See Matthew Commentary) Jesus' first words are a warning which in turn echo a warning from the first sermon (Mt 7:15-23+; cf. Mt 18:12-14). And Jesus answered and said to them, "See to it (blepo) that no one misleads (planao) you - Other versions have "Watch out," "Take heed," Be careful." While the verb see (blepo) means to have sight or look at, it also conveys the sense of to look so as to discern or discriminate and thus it can describe a more intentional seeing as reflected by several NAS renderings in other passages as beware (5x), take care (5x), take heed (5x), and guard (1x). Clearly this is the latter sense is that Jesus intends in this context. Note that the disciples had asked when and what but Jesus does not directly answer their questions but gives them a command in the present imperative which means we are to make this our habitual practice, something possible only as one depends on the Holy Spirit (Who they would have indwelling them a little more than 40 days from now). Jesus is warning that so that they are not deceived and led into error regarding these eschatological events. Louw-Nida adds that planao means to cause someone to hold a wrong view and thus be mistaken. Note that misleads (planao) is a Keyword in Matthew 24 - Mt 24:4, 5, 11, 24. As A T
Mateus 24
Constable - The Jews believed that a seven-year period of time will immediately precede Messiah's coming to rule the world. Dwight Pentecost interprets Mt 24:4-8 as correlating with the Seal judgments in the Revelation (See his chapter "Israel in the Tribulation" on page 274 in Things to Come - BORROW). Wycliffe Bible Commentary (written by Homer Kent) - Daniel's seventieth week has two clearly marked halves (Dan 9:27). There is an amazing correspondence between the order of the seals in Rev 6 and the order of events in Mt 24:4-14. Thus these verses must be placed in the first three and one-half years of the Tribulation, after the Church has been raptured. 5. Saying, I am Christ (cf. Rev 6:1, 2; first seal: Anti-christ). Though such tendencies may develop during the church age (1 Jn 4:3), the specific reference is to the final Antichrist and his associates. There is no record of any person's claiming to be Christ between A.D. 30 and 70. 6. Wars and rumors of wars (cf. Rev 6:3, 4; second seal: warfare). 7. Famines (cf. Rev 6:5, 6 third seal: famine). Pestilences and earthquakes ( Cf. Rev 6:7, 8; fourth seal: death for one-fourth of the earth). 8. Beginning of sorrows. Literally, of birthpains, suggesting the travail shortly to be followed by a happier day. 9. Shall kill you (cf. Rev 6:9-11; fifth seal: martyrs). 11. Many false prophets . . . shall deceive many. Cf. 2 Thess 2:8-12. 12. The love of many shall wax cold. The severity of these calamities will cause the majority of Israel to abandon any pretense of piety. 13. But the distinguishing mark of the saved Jewish remnant will be their enduring in faith to the end. 14. Gospel of the kingdom. The good news of salvation in the Messiah, with the emphasis that the Messianic kingdom is about to be established. This message will go into all the world during the Tribulation through the efforts of the two witnesses (Rev 11:3-12) and the sealed remnant of Israel (Rev 7). (4) Interpret the events in Mt 24:4-14 and Mt 24:15 as fulfilled in the past. This is the classic preterist interpretation. They interpret the phrase "the end" as a reference to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. Example - R. T. France (The Gospel of Matthew - NICNT) - "(Comment on Mt 24:6) The period from the 30s to the 60s (Ed: Speaking of 30-60 AD) was relatively peaceful in the Roman empire as a whole, but in the east there were wars with Parthia in and after AD 36, and a more local war between Antipas and the Nabatean king Aretas in which the Romans became involved in AD 36-37...the disciples must not get things out of perspective, or be panicked into imagining that "the end" is imminent (Ed: For France "the end" is the destruction of the Temple)....The question which Jesus is here answering was about when the temple would be destroyed, and that is the "end" most naturally understood here....(Comment on Mt 24:7) Such historical records as we have for the first century mention earthquakes in Asia Minor in AD 61and in Italy in AD 62, in Jerusalem in AD 67, and another serious earthquake at an unspecified earlier date in Palestine. A widespread famine around AD 46 is mentioned in Acts 11:28.....(Comment on Mt 24:8) In later rabbinic literature the phrase "the labor pain (always singular) of the Messiah" comes to be used almost as a technical term for the period of suffering preceding the Messiah's coming...It gains its sense from the context, and the context here is of the suffering of Jerusalem which will be more fully described in Mt 24:15-22....(Comment on Mt 24:13) whoever stands firm throughout the historical process which will culminate in the destruction of the Temple will be saved. in the destruction of the temple will be saved. But it is not easy to see what sort of "salvation" fits that scenario. (Ed: Could it be that it is difficult to see because the interpretation is incorrect?).....(Comment on Mt 24:14) This saying ("The gospel...preached in the whole world for a witness to all the nations") comes unexpectedly here, not only because it provides a note of hope and triumph in an otherwise threatening context, but also because, like Mt 26:13, it already envisages a world-wide proclamation of the good news. (Ed: France is forced to jettison for a moment his historical past fulfillment stance writing)...the implication seems to be that the "end" will not come until the proclamation has already reached "all over the world." (ED: INTERESTING!) (Bolding added) Albert
Mateus 24
Constable - "Therefore" or "So" (Gr. oun) ties pericope very closely to the preceding one. (Matthew 24 Commentary - Expository Notes) Hiebert comments - "Jesus describes the end-time crisis, the sign that the disciples had asked for (Mt 24:3). They were ardently hoping that their Master would speedily establish His earthly kingdom (Ed: see their question in Acts 1:6, cf Lk 19:11). Their views of the future were still essentially Jewish, and they conceived of the anticipated Messianic Kingdom in relation to the people of Israel. As yet, they had no clear concept of the coming church. If Jesus had spoken to them of the rapture in the future, He would only have added confusion to the limited understanding they had of what He had already said." (Ed: As an aside, most commentators agree that there is no mention of the Rapture in Matthew 24-25.) (The Gospel of Mark- An Expositional Commentary- D. Edmond Hiebert) SUMMARY INTERPRETATION Here is my summary interpretation of Mt 24:15 which will be explained in more detail in the remainder of the comments and compared with other interpretations. This summary is based primarily on simple observation of the Scripture, reading the text for the plain sense (literally), not looking for hidden meanings and comparing the text with related or parallel Scriptures to help understand Jesus' intended meaning. This summary is not based on a specific system of interpretation. Even though some might say the summary sounds like a dispensational interpretation, I am not a dispensationalist. That said, without further qualification, here is the summary of Matthew 24:15 (Note: the "+" identifies a link to notes related to the passage): Jesus has just ended Mt 24:14-note with the words "the end" (the very last Greek word in Mt 24:14) and now responds to the disciples' initial request for a sign (Mt 24:3+) by giving them a very unique sign which will mark the beginning of the end of this age (Mt 24:3+). And so Jesus describes a specific sign, one which has not occurred in the past (but which had been foreshadowed-see Da 8:13, Da 11:31), and which will literally be fulfilled in the future. Recall that a sign is something that one can see which points to something else. In Mt 24:15 Jesus says "when you see" indicating that this is a visible sign. He explains that the sign is the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place. He also explains that study of the book of Daniel will help the reader understand the sign. The Temple was destroyed in 70AD, but Jesus says the sign is of some one or some thing standing in the Temple (holy place). Of course the problem with Jesus' prophecy is that there is currently no Temple. It follows that the Jewish Temple must be rebuilt in Jerusalem (see note). If God can cause the nation of Israel to be reborn in May, 1948 against all odds, then a rebuilt Temple will not be too difficult for Him (Jer 32:17+, Jer 32:27+). Does this take faith to accept? Of course it does, but the assurance of things hoped for and the conviction of things not seen (a rebuilt Temple, Heb 11:1+) are based not on an active imagination but on our faithful God (Lam 3:23) and His faith producing Word (Ro 10:17+, cf John's description of the temple in Rev 11:2+, compare Paul's mention of Antichrist taking his seat in the Temple in 2Th 2:3-+, 2Th 2:4+, see note on Tribulation Temple). Daniel 9:27+ describes a prince who is to come (Da 9:26+) who will make a 7 year covenant ("one week" - see Daniel's Seventieth Week) with the "many," the "many" clearly being the Jews in context ("your [Daniel a Jewish man's] people" Da 9:24+). This "prince" is the Antichrist (name used only in 1Jn 2:18+) who Daniel identifies as the "Little Horn" and who rises to power out of a 10 nation confederacy (Daniel 7:8+, cp Da 2:44-45+ where "the days of those kings" = "10 toe stage" [Da 2:42+] = 10 horns = 10 kings - cp Da 7:24+). The first 3.5 years, his devilish character is not obvious (see note on Rev 6:2), but in the middle of the 7 year "peace" covenant, he breaks the covenant with Israel and puts a stop to sacrifices and offerings in the rebuilt Temple (Da 9:27+) fulfilling Jesus' prophecy in Mt 24:15. Daniel says he also (as the "Little Horn") will overpower 3 of the original 10 members of the confederacy (Da 7:8+, Da 7:20+). Paul adds that the Antichrist (aka "man of lawlessness...son of perdition") will go into the "holy place," the rebuilt Temple, and take "his seat in the Temple of God, displaying himself as being God." (" 2Th 2:3+, 2Th 2:4+, cp Da 11:36 2Th 2:3- 2Th 2:3- 2Th 2:3-+) In so doing he will commit the abomination that makes the Temple desolate. Note that this sign is not the Roman army surrounding Jerusalem in the past (70AD - cp Lk 21:20+), but a real person who will commit a real act of defilement (abomination) of the Jewish Temple in the future. At this same time, in the midpoint of the 7 year covenant, the Antichrist (aka "The Beast") is empowered by the dragon (the devil) for 42 months or the last 3.5 years of the 7 year period (Rev 13:4-5+) However, since it is unlikely the Antichrist will personally remain standing in the holy place, it is more likely that it is his image which the false prophet creates and commands the world to worship, which will remain standing in the holy place (cp Rev 13:14-15+, Rev 14:9, 11+, Rev 16:2+, Rev 19:20+, contrast Rev 20:4+) During this last 3.5 years, the Antichrist will begin to pursue and persecute the Jews, which is the impetus for Jesus taking five verses to command and convince the Jews to flee when they see the sign of the abomination of desolation! During his last 3.5 years of the Seventieth Week, the Antichrist "will speak out against the Most High (beginning in Mt 24:15, 2Th 2:4 2Th 2:4, blaspheming God - Rev 13:6+, cp his great, boasts - Da 7:8+, Da 7:11+, Da 7:20+) and wear down the saints of the Highest One, with the intent to make alterations in times and in law (cp Da 9:27+ "stop to sacrifice and grain offering"); and they (the Jews) will be given into his hand for a time, times, and half a time." (Da 7:25+ = Da 7:21+ = the Little Horn who "was waging war with the [Jewish] saints and overpowering them") In other words, after the Antichrist breaks his covenant with the Jews, they will be given into his hand for "time, times and half a time" (3.5 years, John says 1260 days in Rev 12:6+, which he repeats in Rev 12:14+ = "time, times, and half a time" = 42 months). John records "it was given to him (the Antichrist) to make war with the saints (the Jews first, but then to all who refuse to worship his image - Rev 13:15+) and to overcome them; and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him." (Rev 13:7+) For how long? Three and one-half years beginning with the unmistakably clear sign in Mt 24:15 which inaugurates the time Jesus calls the "Great Tribulation" (Mt 24:21+ = Mk 13:19 = the "time of Jacob's distress" = Jer 30:7+) a time "such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall," a time which Daniel describes as "a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time" (Da 12:1+) but a time which "shall be cut short" (Mt 24:22) after "a time, times, and half a time" (Da 12:7+), during which "many (Jews) will be purged, purified and refined." (Da 12:10+, cf Zech 13:8, 9, Zech 12:10, Ro 11:26-27+) God will allow the Antichrist 1260 days (42 months) to do his worst, but not one day longer, because the true Christ will return and bring that Lawless One "to an end by the appearance of His coming" (2Thes 2:7-8, 9-10). Then the true Christ will fulfill many OT prophecies (Amos 9:11,12, Jer 30:9+, Jer 31:28+, Jer 32:42, 43+, Jer 33:14, 15, 16+, Ezek 37:22, 23, 24, 25+, Zech 14:11, 16, 17), and set up His 1000 year Kingdom on earth (cp Acts 1:6, 15:13-14, 15-18, Lk 19:11 Rev 20:4-5+), demonstrating God's best after 3.5 years of Satan's worst! Indeed, "Then the sovereignty, the dominion, and the greatness of all the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be given to the people of the saints of the Highest One; His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all the dominions will serve and obey Him." (Da 7:27+) Ray
Mateus 24
Constable - The abomination of desolation "describes something that because of its abominable character causes the godly to desert the temple on its account." D A Carson says the abomination of desolation "means "the abomination characterized by desolation," leaving it unclear whether the abomination "causes" desolation (NIV; cf. McNeile, "the abominable thing that layeth waste"; RSV, "the desolating sacrilege") or is simply a token of it. The former is more likely. The expression occurs four times in Daniel (Da 8:13; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). (BORROW Expositor's Bible Commentary) (Bolding added) R C H Lenski on abomination of desolation - "Abomination" is the main term, something that is utterly abominable in God's sight, and this will occur right in the Temple that is consecrated to God. The genitive "of desolation" characterizes the abomination according to the effect it must produce, namely desolate the desecrated Temple, leave it empty of worshippers. The moment the believers see this (and it is something unmistakable and easy to see) they are to flee the country posthaste. (The Interpretation of St Matthew's Gospel) Note that Lenski (who interprets Mt 24:15 as fulfilled in 70AD) reads "holy place" literally recognizing the abomination as something that "will occur right in the Temple" and also acknowledges that the abomination will be a clear, visible warning, one which allows those who see it time to flee the fury that follows! So what is the sign? What is the abomination of desolation that makes desolate and serves as a signal to those who see it to flee? While there are many interpretations of the identity of the abomination of desolation (including Pilate, Caligula, Hadrian, etc) there really only 3 main interpretations, and remember only one can be the correct interpretation. (1) The Future Antichrist - This is only futuristic interpretation and it refers either to the Antichrist himself and/or his blasphemous image. (2) The Roman Army - This is by far the most popular interpretation, but as will be shown below is also the most improbable interpretation! Most commentators base this interpretation on Luke's similar (but note carefully -- not identical) description in Luke 21:20-24. See Chart comparing and contrasting the descriptions by Luke and Matthew. Most Bible Dictionaries favor this interpretation (Easton, Smith, but the Morrish Dictionary is an exception) (3) The Jewish Zealots - "Shortly before A.D. 70 the Zealots were in the temple precincts during the war with Rome, and their presence could have been considered a desecration." (Reformation Study Bible - preterist interpretation) Henry Alford holds this view (Ref). Why would the Zealots be offered as a candidate for the abomination? It is because these commentators recognize the problem of identifying the Roman Army as the abomination and understand it could not possibly be the Roman Army because it would have been too late to flee the city once the Army had broken into the city. All of the most "highly acclaimed" commentaries on Matthew interpret the abomination in light of Luke 21:20-24 and thus usually interpret the abomination as the Roman Army. A survey of Matthew commentaries written prior to 1900 as show that almost all of these commentaries also identify the abomination of desolation as the Roman Army and very few even mention the possibility that this might be related to the Antichrist (Trapp is an exception). The paucity of older (and even newer) commentaries that mention the possibility that the Antichrist is the abomination of desolation is surprising in light of the fact that "the earliest and best supported identification equates this desecration with the Antichrist. As early as Hippolytus (170-235AD; click for eschatology of Hippolytus) and Irenaeus, (130-202AD) 2Th 2:3-note, 2Th 2:4-note had been associated with Mk 13:14. This adversary (1) exalts himself and opposes everything connected with God, (2) sits in the sanctuary of God, and (3) proclaims that he is God. Since Mark had used a masculine participle, hestēkóta, where the antecedent would normally have demanded a neuter, this connection seems secure." (ISBE, revised edition) (Related resource: References to the Antichrist in the Early Church) Some like Albert Barnes (published in the 1880's) flat out stated "The abomination of desolation means the Roman army, and is so explained by Luke 21:20." One modern writer, Larry Chouinard, has an interesting comment on the identification of the abomination writing - Some have speculated that the presence of Roman soldiers and the planting of their shields in the temple precincts might be the detestable act that will signal the necessity of flight. However, once the Romans had entered the city and planted their shields on holy ground it would have been too late to safely flee the city (see Josephus, J.W. 6.6.1, 316). Other attempts to identify some specific event that might be understood as the "desolating sacrilege" can at best be viewed only as guesswork. The most that can be said is that the disciples were to flee when events associated with the Jewish wars (A.D. 66-70) so compromised the sanctity of the temple that its destruction was inevitable. (Matthew, College Press, 1997) Can you see the basic flaw in his logic? Jesus is describing a clearly visible sign ("When you see..."), but if it is something that can be "viewed only as guesswork," then it is hardly a reliable sign! A sign points to something, but you have to be able to read and understand (just as Jesus' commanded in Mt 24:15 "let the reader understand") the sign in order to recognize the thing to which it points. So this issue is more than a matter of intellectual debate, for in the future when the abomination stands in the holy place, it is Jesus' clear signal to flee for you life! Adam Clarke also dogmatically states that the "abomination of desolation, St. Luke, (Luke 21:20, 21:21), refers to the Roman army; and this abomination standing in the holy place is the Roman army besieging Jerusalem....The Roman army is called an abomination, for its ensigns and images, which were so to the Jews. Josephus says, (War, b. vi. chap. 6 - see this quote in my comment below), the Romans brought their ensigns into the temple, and placed them over against the eastern gate, and sacrificed to them there. The Roman army is therefore fitly called the abomination, and the abomination which maketh desolate, as it was to desolate and lay waste Jerusalem; and this army besieging Jerusalem is called by St. Mark, Mark 13:14, standing where it ought not, that is, as in the text here, the holy place; as not only the city (Ed: Mt 24:15 makes NO mention of "the city!"), but a considerable compass of ground about it, was deemed holy, and consequently no profane persons should stand on it." (Ref) Comment on Adam Clarke's interpretation - First let's read the quote from Josephus to which Clarke alludes = "And now the Romans, upon the flight of the seditious into the city, and upon the burning of the holy house itself, and of all the buildings round about it, brought their ensigns (See Kitto's diagrams) to the temple, (18) and set them over-against its eastern gate. And there (Ed: Where? At the Eastern Gate!) did they offer sacrifices to them: and there did they make Titus Imperator (19) with the greatest acclamations of joy." (Josephus- Of the War, Book VI. Chapter 6.1) What do you observe about the sequence of events? Note that the "holy house itself and all of the buildings round about" was burned. You may be asking "So what?" Well, the point is that Jesus clearly stated the abomination would stand in the holy place, but that is a problem, because there was no holy place in which the ensigns could be standing! Jesus' words literally interpreted are thus not fulfilled by the placement of the ensigns "over-against its eastern gate." You may say that is simply semantics but the simple fact is that these sacrifices, as abominable as they were, were NOT performed in the holy place because the holy place had been burned! Words mean something and the point is that Jesus' words are not fulfilled by the Roman Army according to Josephus' description (see following discussion). WHY THE ABOMINATION IS NOT THE ROMAN ARMY It is surprising that so many writers interpret the Roman army as the entity which Jesus predicted would be "standing in the holy place," the Jewish Temple (Mt 24:15)! Below is a summary of the reasons that illustrate why such an interpretation is very unlikely. (1) If one reads Jesus' words literally, the interpretation of the Roman Army as the abomination is not even logical. Why? Because it is not even a physical possibility--there would not be enough room for the Roman army to stand IN the Temple! Of course commentators are forced to "interpolate" Jesus' words and say He did not mean the Temple proper but the Temple grounds, or something to this effect. (2) Jesus clearly stated the abomination will be standing in the holy place. He did not say it would be encircling or surrounding the city. Standing (Mt 24:15) and surrounded (Lk 21:20) are distinct, different verbs indicating different actions. (3) Jesus did not generalize and say the abomination would occur in the city of Jerusalem. but clearly stated that the abomination would take place in the holy place, the Jewish Temple. (4) Compare the parallel passage in Mark: "the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be." (Mk 13:14ESV) Comment: Notice that the ESV does have have "standing where it" but "standing where he" which is an accurate translation of the Greek verb standing which is masculine gender and singular. It would be difficult to say this "he" of Mk 13:14ESV is the Roman Army! It follows that Mark's use of the masculine singular to describe the abomination is much more compatible with an individual rather than an army! Indeed, the well respected ESV Study Bible note on Mark 13:14ESV reads "The abomination of desolation (cf. Dan. 9:27; 11:31; 12:11) points to the Antichrist's ultimate desecration of God's temple." (Bolding added for emphasis) (ESV Study Bible BORROW) (5) Jesus refers the reader to Daniel, explaining that Daniel spoke about the abomination. In light of Jesus' recommendation, it is notable that Daniel spoke extensively about the Antichrist in chapters 7, 9 and 11 (the "Little Horn", "the Beast," "the King"). So this begs the question, did Daniel speak about the Roman army? While the King James Version has a translation note on Da 9:27 that says "with the abominable armies," the Hebrew word this marginal NOTE (not the actual translation) translates as "armies" is kanaph which is better translated wing. In fact not one of the 85 uses of kanaph in the Old Testament is translated as army in either the NAS [bird*(1), corner(1), corners(4), covering(1), each other(1), edge(5), edges(1), ends(3), fold(2), garment(1), kind(3), skirt(3), skirts(1), sorts(1), wing(14), winged(5), wings(58), wings were each other(1), wingspan(1).] or the KJV (wing 74, skirt 14, borders 2, corners 2, ends 2, feathered 2, sort 2, winged 2, misc 8)! In sum, to appeal to the lone KJV translation NOTE which is not found in any other version is tenuous, especially if one seeks to use this point as a major argument that Mt 24:15 is a description of the Roman army. (6) By the time the Roman Army was "standing" in the holy place, it would have been too late to flee. (See also point #7) Many of the commentaries which favor a 70AD interpretation of Mt 24:15 are forced to admit that this fact creates a serious problem with their interpretation. For example, the Pulpit Commentary writes "If the Temple itself is meant (referring to the phrase "holy place"), it is plain that it would be too late to fly from that doomed city when the Roman eagles were already in the hallowed courts." The respected theologian D A Carson (discussed more below) states "The obvious occasion (Ed: of the occurrence of the abomination of desolation), in general terms, is AD 70, though certain difficulties must be faced." Carson explains one serious difficulty with a 70AD interpretation writing that "by the time the Romans had actually desecrated the Temple in AD 70, it was too late for anyone in the city to flee." John Broadus recognizing problem #6, writes "Holy place cannot well mean distinctively the temple in this case, for when the Roman standards stood in the temple it was too late for fleeing to the mountain." (Ref) Broadus makes at least two errors. (1) As discussed in #7 the Roman standards were never placed in the actual Temple. (2) Broadus is so committed to the 70AD interpretation that he is willing to say holy place does not really mean holy place, the Temple! Beloved, Jesus was very clear about where the abomination of desolation would stand, unless one seeks to attribute to Mt 24:15 an interpretation which Jesus never intended! (7) Josephus writes that when the city walls were finally scaled, the Temple itself was actually burned. Therefore it would not have been possible for the Roman Army to place their idolatrous ensigns in the holy place. In fact Josephus says that they placed them against the gate on the East. The gate on the East is NOT the holy place. (See Josephus- Of the War, Book 6. Chapter 6. Paragraph 1 ) (8) Josephus records that Titus had a "retaining wall" constructed around Jerusalem prior to entering the city which would have removed all hope of escape for Jews still in the city. (See Josephus' record) Notice that this retaining wall was built before the Roman Army even broke through the walls of Jerusalem, before the Roman Army could even have stood in the holy place! Another historical fact recorded by Thoralf Gilbrant is that "the Romans cut down every tree within a mile of Jerusalem, so there would be no cover to help people escape or to allow food or supplies to be brought in. Thus the conditions mentioned in this verse fit the later time of tribulation foretold in the Book of Revelation and in Daniel 9 (Daniel's 70th Week), rather than 70 AD." (The Complete Biblical Library: The New Testament Study Bible - Matthew). (9) Another reason that the Roman Army is unlikely the abomination in Mt 24:15 is that as Jesus presents the sign, the sign seems to happen rather abruptly, which implies that it will take the spectators by surprise. And yet clearly there was no surprise when the Romans advanced and began to lay siege to the city for seven months before its fall in September, AD 70. Admittedly this argument is somewhat "softer," but still has merit. David
Mateus 24
Constable remarks on those who hold that this prophecy was fulfilled "when the Romans brought their standards bearing the image of Caesar into the temple and offered sacrifices to their gods they set up the abomination that Daniel predicted. The main problem with this view is that Jesus told the Jews living in Jerusalem and Judea to flee when the abomination appeared in the temple (Mt 24:16-20). However when the Romans finally desecrated the temple in 70 A.D. most of the Jews had already left Jerusalem and Judea." (Emphasis added) (Matthew 24 Commentary) Ron Bigalke notes that "Titus did not enter the city of Jerusalem until after the construction of his wall and the famine consumed the Jews. Therefore, it would be impossible to heed the commands of Jesus to flee the city because of witnessing the abomination of desolation spoken in Matthew 24:15 (Ed comment: Bigalke is saying the preterist interpretation that the Roman army is the abomination in Mt 24:15 does not allow the inhabitants to flee!). It should be mentioned again that any sacrilege on the part of the Romans was after the city and Temple were destroyed." (Preterism And Antiquity- Was Preterism a View of the Early Church) (3) This point is somewhat similar to the previous one but has slightly different emphasis. It is notable that not once did Josephus (The Wars of the Jews) record an "abomination of desolation" in the holy place PRIOR to the Temple's destruction (as a literal reading of Mt 24:15 would demand). In fact AFTER the Temple was destroyed Josephus wrote "And now the Romans, upon the flight of the seditious into the city, and upon the burning of the holy house itself, and of all the buildings round about it, brought their ensigns to the temple, and set them over against its eastern gate; and there did they offer sacrifices to them, and there did they make Titus imperator, with the greatest acclamations of joy [Josephus- Of the War, Book 6. Chapter 6. Paragraph 1]." In other words the holy place was no longer intact when the Romans offered sacrifices to their pagan gods. It is also worth noting that the Christian historian Phillip Schaff alluded to the preceding quote by Josephus in his multi-volume History of the Christian Church writing "Thus was fulfilled the prophecy concerning the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place." Notice that either Schaff misquoted Josephus or he offered his own conclusion in an attempt to validate his belief that the "abomination of desolation" Jesus description in Mt 24:15 was committed by the Romans in 70AD. But Josephus never made that statement! Not only does a non-literal approach necessitate twisting of the inspired Scriptures, but also frequently involves distortion of secular historical records! (4) If the elect are Christians who escaped to Pella in the Transjordan as described in extra-biblical literature, what need would there have been for shortening of those days (Mt 24:22)? In other words, those who had heeded Jesus' warning in Luke 21:20-note (which I believe does indeed refer to the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem - see explanation) had already fled and thus preserved their lives. (5) Mt 24:29-30 states that Jesus returns immediately after the Great Tribulation. If Mt 24:15-28 was fulfilled in 70 AD, one would have to totally spiritualize Jesus' words and say that He came spiritually but not visibly, which is what preterist interpretations are forced to do. R C Sproul (see note below) for example writes "The great tribulation refers to the siege of Jerusalem." (He is referring to 70AD). But a normal reading of the text does not leave room for spiritualization of Jesus' Second Coming! Notice Jesus' words in Mt 24:27 "For just as the lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be." What is He saying? Is He describing something that is not normally visible to all who have eyes to see? Of course He is. He is saying very plainly that the coming of the Son of Man will be a visible event, like lightning when it lights up the entire sky! And in Mt 24:30 He describes "the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory." That sounds like an event which is visible. The plain reading indicates a literal, visible return, just as the angel had promised in Acts 1:11 and as John attested to in Revelation writing that at the return of Jesus "every eye will see Him" (Rev 1:7-note). Beloved, He did not return immediately after the events described in Mt 24:15-28! Related Resource: See Tony Garland's refutation of R C Sproul's unusual teachings on the last days (6) Mt 24:14-note speaks of the end of this age ("then the end shall come") which is connected to the following section (Mt 24:15-28) with a "therefore ("So when" - ESV, NET, NIV)" It follows that Jesus' description in Mt 24:14-28 is also related to the end of this age. If one holds that Matthew 24 was fulfilled in the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem in 70AD, it would be very difficult to explain Mt 24:15-28. (7) In Matthew the abomination comes first (Mt 24:15), and then is followed by the Tribulation (Mt 24:21). In 70AD the siege of Titus which many interpret as the abomination was contemporaneous with the great distress (Lk 21:23). THE FOLLOWING WRITERS FAVOR MATTHEW 24:15-26 AS A FUTURE EVENT Thomas Constable - There are several reasons why the abomination of desolation must be a future event in God's eschatological program. First, verse 15 is in a context of verses that describes events that have not yet happened (vv. 14-21; cf. v. 29). Second, Daniel's seventieth week with its unique tribulation has not yet happened. Third, Mark described Jesus saying that the abomination of desolation would stand (masculine participle estekota) as a person who set himself up as God in the temple (Mark 13:14). This has never happened since Jesus made this prophecy. Fourth, other later revelation points to the future Antichrist as the abomination of desolation (2Thes 2:3-4; Rev. 13:11-18). (Matthew 24 Commentary) Ray
Mateus 24
Constable notes that "Some interpreters have made a case for this being a reference to the Rapture because Jesus used two different words for "take" in the context. In Mt 24:39 the Greek verb is airo whereas in Mt 24:40, 41 He used paralambano. The argument is that paralambano is a word that describes Jesus taking His own to Himself. However it also occurs in a bad sense (Mt 4:5, 8; Jn 19:16)." (Matthew 24 - Expository Notes) Charles Ryrie - The ones taken will be taken to judgment and death. The ones left will be left to enter the blessings of the millennial kingdom. (Ryrie study Bible: New American Standard Bible) Two men in the field - They may be fathers and son, brothers, lifelong friends, but they will soon be separated! Why? Because one has through grace placed their faith in Jesus Christ for their eternal salvation, and the other one has rejected Christ's offer of salvation. This division will not be a temporary but a permanent eternal separation! And when does this forever separation transpire? When Jesus returns at a time unknown to both parties. One is spiritually alive and prepared, while the other is spiritually dead and bankrupt. One will be taken - Although paralambano means to take to one's self and to seize for one's own possession, and is usually used in a good sense (eg Jn 14:3), in Mt 24:40 the context is not good so that this is clearly not a proof text to support the Rapture of the saints as some commentators state! The one… taken will be taken to judgment and eternal punishment (Second Death). The one… left will enter into the blessings of the Millennial Kingdom. When Noah entered the ark who was left on the earth after the flood? The believers were the only ones to survive the flood (the ones not taken) Only those in the ark were safe, which is a beautiful metaphor for believers today who are IN CHRIST, eternally secure "in the Ark" so to speak! Stuart Weber on one taken… one left - "Everyone needs to heed these warnings." One of each pair was prepared because he or she knew Jesus' teachings, had watched for the signs, and had remained obedient. The other in each pair was unprepared, because he or she had either been ignorant of Jesus' teaching or else simply ignored them and not lived according to the righteous standards of the king and his kingdom. Such people were taken from the scene when the king returned to rule. Jesus' point was: be prepared. His arrival will be sudden and unpredictable. (Holman New Testament Commentary) Noah was one left. Why? Was it because Noah was so good? Of course not. Moses records "Then the LORD said to Noah, "Enter the ark, you and all your household; for you alone I have seen to be righteous before Me in this time." (Ge 7:1, Heb 11:7-note = This passage clearly shows how genuine faith is not static but is dynamic and results in obedience. Obedience does not save anyone but it demonstrates that one is genuinely saved. Beloved, if you say you are saved, that you walked an aisle 30 years ago but you having living like the devil ever since, then there is a great likelihood that you will not be on the ark with Noah. You need to repent and confess Jesus as Lord and be born again by His Spirit! Ro 10:9, 10-note, John 3:3-5, Titus 3:5, 6-note, Eph 2:8,9-note) Related studies on faith and obedience: Relationship of faith and obedience - Covenant Obedience of faith - Ro 1:5, 16:25 James 2:14-26 Comments on Faith and Works
Mateus 24
Constable - The point of this parable is that if a homeowner knows the general time when a thief will break in he will prepare accordingly. The signs of the times during the Tribulation that Jesus revealed (vv. 5-22) will enable believers to know the general time He will return. Consequently believers in the Tribulation should prepare themselves. Allowed (1439)(eao) means to let be, to permit, to allow, to let, not to hinder (Mt 24:43 Lk 4:41 Acts 14:16 Acts 27:32 Acts 28:4 1Co10:13) Robertson on broken into - Dug through the tile roof or under the floor (dirt in the poorer houses). (Word Pictures in the New Testament) Broken into (1358)(diorhusso from dia = through + orusso = to dig) speaks of a thief who gains entrance into a house by digging through a wall and thus breaks in or through (Mt 6:19, Mt 6:20, Mt 24:43, Lk 12:39 = all the uses in the NT). There are 4 uses in the Septuagint - Job 24:16 (describing an adulterer in Job 24:25 "in the dark they dig into houses"), Ezek 12:5, 7, 12 where it means to literally dig a hole through a wall. Liddell-Scott-Jones on diorhusso - dig through, having dug a trench across or along, metaphorically to undermine or ruin (Eccl 5:6). To worm out. To be shut up in a funeral vault. Moulton-Milligan note the exact phrase as used in the Gospels is found in a secular Greek writing - ";because he broke into a house." Jesus may come at any time, so we must be ready all the time. Phil Newton on thieves in the night - Thieves are not accustomed to announcing the place, date, and time of their next heist! They operate by stealth, catching homeowners off guard, breaking in when least expected. It is rather curious that Jesus used such an illustration to help us think about His return. Several of the New Testament writers follow His lead and do the same (1Th 5:2 2Pe 3:10). If you knew that a thief had plans to rob your home at 1:00 AM on Tuesday, you would be ready: phone in hand, lights on, wide-eyed, pacing quietly from window to door, peaking through the blinds, listening to the sound of crunching leaves or breaking twigs near your house. But since you do not know if or when a thief might break in, you still make preparations. You keep your windows and doors locked. You add security measures to the perimeter of your home. You quickly check out any noisy disturbances during the night. You and I do this even though we may never been broken into by thieves. We prepare, just in case of a break-in. Jesus is telling us to prepare for something that is certain. He will return. We do not know the time or day. We cannot pinpoint a spot on a prophetic calendar to give us ease of mind about when He comes. He calls for us to be ready to meet Him at any time. "Be ready," because we do not know when Christ comes, and we do not want Him to return and find us unprepared. Are you prepared to meet Jesus Christ? Do you regularly cultivate your spiritual life so that you are sensitive to anything that might dull you or weaken your passion for Christ? Since we do not know the day of Christ's return, then we must treat everyday as if this might be the day. What changes do you need to make in your spiritual life to live with that kind of mind? Let us take action, for behold, He comes! (Mt 24:36-44 When Will Christ Return?) (Alert, Ready, and Faithful) Alfred Plummer - There are matters in which it suffices to watch by day; at night one may sleep. But the man whose house has been broken into and plundered in the night has to abandon that doctrine, and so must the Christian: comp. 1Th 5:4; 2 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 3:3, 16:15. (An exegetical commentary on the Gospel according to S. Matthew) Matthew 24:44 "For this reason you also must be ready; for the Son of Man is coming at an hour when you do not think He will. : dia touto kai humeis ginesthe (3PPMM) hetoimoi hoti e ou dokeite (2PPAI) hora o huios tou anthropou erchetai (3SPMI): CLICK FOR >60 ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THIS VERSE Mt 25:10,13 Lu 12:40 Php 4:5 Jas 5:9 Rev 19:7 Matthew 24 Resources - Multiple Sermons and Commentaries READY FOR OUR REDEEMER'S RETURN For this reason (on account of this) (dia touto) - On account of the fact of the uncertainty of the time of the return and the certainty of being caught unprepared if you do not stay on the alert. Must be (1093)(ginomai) means to become, and in this context to become ready. Note that the verb be is in the present imperative which calls for continual attitude, something which is only possible as we continually depend on the enabling power of the Holy Spirit! Don't just grit your teeth and say "I'm going to stay ready!" You don't just need a little "help" or a little push to to speak. You need the Spirit to initiate in your heart a desire and give you the power to carry out the desire (cp Php 2:13-note). Be is in the middle voice, which is reflexive and indicates the subject initiates the action (enabled by the Spirit) and participates in the effects or results of the action. Jesus gave a similar command in Luke 12:40 - You too, be (present imperative) ready (hetoimos); for (term of explanation = explains "Why?") the Son of Man is coming at an hour that you do not expect." John
Mateus 24:1-3
Constable: The connection between Jesus being almost at Jerusalem and the kingdom appearing immediately implies that the believers in the crowd expected Jesus to begin the kingdom when He arrived there. Jesus had just told Zaccheus that salvation had come to his house that day (Lk 19:9+), but salvation would not come to Israel for some time. Even though the Son of Man had come to seek and to save the lost (Lk 19:10+), the national deliverance of Israel would have to wait. What follows (Lk 19:12-27+) is another of the many passages in Luke that records Jesus' teaching about the future. (Ed: Quoting Tannehill who adds) "In Luke 19:11 the disciples are pictured as expecting something that should have been and could have been apart from the rejection of Jesus. But because of this rejection, the Messianic Kingdom for Israel does not come immediately, as the disciples mistakenly hoped. We see that in Luke-Acts the problem of eschatological delay is intertwined with the problem of Jewish rejection." (Luke 19 Commentary) Walter L Liefeld - Obviously this parable teaches that Jesus predicted an interval of time between His ascension and return. For the time when the kingdom will be restored to Israel, see the beginning of Luke's second volume (Acts 1:6-7+). (Expositor's Bible Commentary, 1984) (3) Acts - It is notable that the very last question the disciples ask Jesus before His ascension was about the timing of the Messianic Kingdom. And so when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, "Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; 8 but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth." (Acts 1:6-8-see commentary) Comment: Notice that Jesus did not correct their belief but explained they the timing of "times or epochs" were in the hands of His Father. He did teach them that they had another mission which was to carry the Gospel to ends of the world. There is little doubt that some 40+ days earlier the disciples' question in Matthew 24:3 reflected their belief that Jesus was about to set up His earthly Messianic Kingdom. ESV Study Bible: The place of the disciples' assembly was the Mount of Olives (Acts 1:12+), at the foot of which lay Bethany (Luke 24:50). The disciples asked Jesus when He would restore the kingdom to Israel because they concluded from His resurrection and the promise of the Spirit that the Messianic era had dawned and the final salvation of Israel was imminent. However, they were probably still expecting the restoration of a military and political kingdom that would drive out the Roman armies and restore national sovereignty to Israel, as had happened numerous times in the OT. Jesus corrected them, not by rejecting the question, but by telling them (Acts 1:8+) that they would receive power from the Holy Spirit, not in order to triumph over Roman armies but to spread the good news of the gospel throughout the world. In other words, the return is in God's timing; in the meantime, there are other key things believers are to do. Thomas Constable adds: The Old Testament associated Spirit baptism (Ed: Just promised by Jesus in Acts 1:5) with the beginning of the Messianic (millennial) kingdom (Isaiah 32:15-20; Isaiah 44:3-5; Ezekiel 39:28-29; Joel 2:28-32, 3:1; Zechariah 12:8-10). It was natural therefore that the disciples would ask if that kingdom was about to begin in view of Jesus' promise that the Spirit would baptize them in a few days. "This time" refers to "not many days from now" (Acts 1:5). In the Septuagint, the term "restoration" (Greek apokathistemi) technically refers to God's political restoration of Israel (Psalms 16:5; Jeremiah 15:19; Jeremiah 16:15; Jeremiah 23:8; Ezekiel 16:55; Ezekiel 17:23; Hosea 11:11). [Note: J. Carroll, Response to the End of History, p. 146, footnote 124.] The Gentiles had taken the Jews' kingdom from them dating from Nebuchadnezzar's conquest in 586 B.C. Clearly the messianic kingdom is in view here. [Note: See Darrell L. Bock, "Evidence from Acts," in A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 187-88; and Ladd, p. 1125.] "In the book of Acts, both Israel and the church exist simultaneously. The term Israel is used twenty times and ekklesia (church) nineteen times, yet the two groups are always kept distinct." (Acts 1 Commentary) Richard Longenecker - The question the disciples asked reflects the embers of a once blazing hope for a political theocracy in which they would be leaders (cf. Mark 9:33-34; 10:35-41; Luke 22:24). Now the embers are fanned by Jesus' talk of the coming Holy Spirit. In Jewish expectations, the restoration of Israel's fortunes would be marked by the revived activity of God's Spirit, which had been withheld since the last of the prophets. But though his words about the Spirit's coming rekindled in the disciples their old nationalistic hopes, Jesus had something else in mind. (Expositor's Bible Commentary, 1984) (4) Daniel - It is possible the disciples were familiar with Daniel's prophecies, including the prophecy in Daniel 2 which clearly linked Jesus' Second Coming (symbolized by the Stone) with the end of this age (The Stone will crush the statue representative of Gentile powers and Gentile dominion will come to an end when the Stone comes!) and the establishment of His Messianic Kingdom. "You continued looking until a Stone was cut out without hands (the supernatural Stone = Jesus - Ps 118:22, 1Pe 2:4-8), and it struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay, and crushed them. 35 "Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed all at the same time, and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain (symbolizes a "kingdom" - cp Da 2:44) and filled the whole earth. (Da 2:34-35-Commentary) "And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever. 45 "Inasmuch as you saw that a Stone was cut out of the mountain without hands and that it crushed the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold, the great God has made known to the king what will take place in the future; so the dream is true, and its interpretation is trustworthy." (Da 2:44-45-Commentary) Comment: The Stone symbolizes Christ Who at His return will put an end to Gentile dominion (symbolized by the crushing of the statute), thus bringing an end to this age, at which time God will set up His Kingdom which will fill the whole earth. We see the same truth taught in Daniel 7:13-14-note where the Son of Man is given a Kingdom. (Quoted by Jesus as the "sign" of His coming in Mt 24:30; cf the same pattern of the end of the age and of Gentile rule and the beginning of the next age, the Messianic Kingdom in Da 7:26-27-note) The sign - Earlier Jesus has referred to the scribes and Pharisees who had asked for "a sign" as "an evil and adulterous generation." (Mt 12:38-39, cp Mt 16:1-4). He did not rebuke the disciples' request for a sign, for their request was not a manifestation of unbelief but of belief. They believed He was coming again and His coming would be associated with the end of the age. They wanted a warning sign regarding the coming events which they clearly believed would soon come to pass. The parallel passage to Mt 24:3 in found in Mark 13:4 which reads... "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are going to be fulfilled?" Sign (4592)(semeion akin to semaino = to give a sign; sema = a sign) is a distinguishing mark by which something is known, an object, quality, or event whose presence or occurrence indicates the probable presence or occurrence of something else. Below are the three questions (or two questions with the second having two parts) and the signs that signify they are about to take place. Notice that Matthew and Mark do not record the disciples asking Jesus for a sign regarding the destruction of the Temple. However, Luke 21:6-7 records "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down." And they questioned Him, saying, "Teacher, when therefore will these things be? And what will be the sign when these things (What things? Lk 21:6 in context = utter destruction of the Temple) are about to take place?"" Note that the sign in Luke 21:20 is not the same as the sign in Mt 24:15. They are clearly distinctly different signs and to attempt to say they are identical signs is an example of not letting the plain sense of the Scriptures say what they say. The result of course will be an incorrect interpretation. To reiterate, Matthew 24 is indeed a difficult prophecy but the three signs are not difficult to identify unless one comes to the text with a preconceived bias or a desire to make Jesus' words fit one's particular system of theological interpretation. And if one fails to read the text literally, a difficult prophecy becomes even more difficult to accurately interpret! THREE SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS** THREE SURE SIGNS The Prophetic Event The Sign The Timing The Scripture (1) Desolation of Jerusalem Destruction of Temple WHEN YOU SEE... Jerusalem Surrounded by Armies Fulfilled 70AD Luke 21:20+ (2) The End of the Age WHEN YOU SEE... Abomination of Desolation Standing in the Holy Place Yet Future Matthew 24:15+ (3) The Second Coming THE SIGN... The Son of Man Coming in the clouds Yet Future Matthew 24:30+ ** Events (2) and (3) are linked because the Second Coming marks the "end of the age" thus many writers say the disciples asked only two questions, the second having two components. The end of the age - KJV has "end of the world" but as
Mateus 24:1-14
Constable: The connection between Jesus being almost at Jerusalem and the kingdom appearing immediately implies that the believers in the crowd expected Jesus to begin the kingdom when He arrived there. Jesus had just told Zaccheus that salvation had come to his house that day (Lk 19:9), but salvation would not come to Israel for some time. Even though the Son of Man had come to seek and to save the lost (Lk 19:10), the national deliverance of Israel would have to wait. What follows (Lk 19:12-27) is another of the many passages in Luke that records Jesus' teaching about the future. (Ed: Quoting Tannehill who adds) "In Luke 19:11 the disciples are pictured as expecting something that should have been and could have been apart from the rejection of Jesus. But because of this rejection, the Messianic Kingdom for Israel does not come immediately, as the disciples mistakenly hoped. We see that in Luke-Acts the problem of eschatological delay is intertwined with the problem of Jewish rejection." (Luke 19 Commentary) Walter L Liefeld - Obviously this parable teaches that Jesus predicted an interval of time between His ascension and return. For the time when the kingdom will be restored to Israel, see the beginning of Luke's second volume (Acts 1:6-7). (Expositor's Bible Commentary, 1984) (3) Acts - It is notable that the very last question the disciples ask Jesus before His ascension was about the timing of the Messianic Kingdom. And so when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, "Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority; 8 but you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth." (Acts 1:6-8-see commentary on Acts 1:8) Comment: Notice that Jesus did not correct their belief but explained they the timing of "times or epochs" were in the hands of His Father. He did teach them that they had another mission which was to carry the Gospel to ends of the world. There is little doubt that some 40+ days earlier the disciples' question in Matthew 24:3 reflected their belief that Jesus was about to set up His earthly Messianic Kingdom. ESV Study Bible: The place of the disciples' assembly was the Mount of Olives (Acts 1:12), at the foot of which lay Bethany (Luke 24:50). The disciples asked Jesus when He would restore the kingdom to Israel because they concluded from His resurrection and the promise of the Spirit that the Messianic era had dawned and the final salvation of Israel was imminent. However, they were probably still expecting the restoration of a military and political kingdom that would drive out the Roman armies and restore national sovereignty to Israel, as had happened numerous times in the OT. Jesus corrected them, not by rejecting the question, but by telling them (Acts 1:8) that they would receive power from the Holy Spirit, not in order to triumph over Roman armies but to spread the good news of the gospel throughout the world. In other words, the return is in God's timing; in the meantime, there are other key things believers are to do. (Borrow ESV Study Bible) Thomas Constable adds: The Old Testament associated Spirit baptism (Ed: Just promised by Jesus in Acts 1:5) with the beginning of the Messianic (millennial) kingdom (Isaiah 32:15-20; Isaiah 44:3-5; Ezekiel 39:28-29; Joel 2:28-32, 3:1; Zechariah 12:8-10). It was natural therefore that the disciples would ask if that kingdom was about to begin in view of Jesus' promise that the Spirit would baptize them in a few days. "This time" refers to "not many days from now" (Acts 1:5). In the Septuagint, the term "restoration" (Greek apokathistemi) technically refers to God's political restoration of Israel (Psalms 16:5; Jeremiah 15:19; Jeremiah 16:15; Jeremiah 23:8; Ezekiel 16:55; Ezekiel 17:23; Hosea 11:11). [Note: J. Carroll, Response to the End of History, p. 146, footnote 124.] The Gentiles had taken the Jews' kingdom from them dating from Nebuchadnezzar's conquest in 586 B.C. Clearly the messianic kingdom is in view here. [Note: See Darrell L. Bock, "Evidence from Acts," in A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 187-88; and Ladd, p. 1125.] "In the book of Acts, both Israel and the church exist simultaneously. The term Israel is used twenty times and ekklesia (church) nineteen times, yet the two groups are always kept distinct." (Acts 1 Commentary) Richard Longenecker - The question the disciples asked reflects the embers of a once blazing hope for a political theocracy in which they would be leaders (cf. Mark 9:33-34; 10:35-41; Luke 22:24). Now the embers are fanned by Jesus' talk of the coming Holy Spirit. In Jewish expectations, the restoration of Israel's fortunes would be marked by the revived activity of God's Spirit, which had been withheld since the last of the prophets. But though his words about the Spirit's coming rekindled in the disciples their old nationalistic hopes, Jesus had something else in mind. (Expositor's Bible Commentary, 1984) (4) Daniel - It is possible the disciples were familiar with Daniel's prophecies, including the prophecy in Daniel 2 which clearly linked Jesus' Second Coming (symbolized by the Stone) with the end of this age (The Stone will crush the statue representative of Gentile powers and Gentile dominion will come to an end when the Stone comes!) and the establishment of His Messianic Kingdom. "You continued looking until a Stone was cut out without hands (the supernatural Stone = Jesus - Ps 118:22, 1Pe 2:4-8), and it struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay, and crushed them. 35"Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed all at the same time, and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain (symbolizes a "kingdom" - cp Da 2:44) and filled the whole earth. (Da 2:34-35-Commentary) "And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself endure forever. 45 "Inasmuch as you saw that a Stone was cut out of the mountain without hands and that it crushed the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold, the great God has made known to the king what will take place in the future; so the dream is true, and its interpretation is trustworthy." (Da 2:44-45-Commentary) Comment: The Stone symbolizes Christ Who at His return will put an end to Gentile dominion (symbolized by the crushing of the statute), thus bringing an end to this age, at which time God will set up His Kingdom which will fill the whole earth. We see the same truth taught in Daniel 7:13-14-note where the Son of Man is given a Kingdom. (Quoted by Jesus as the "sign" of His coming in Mt 24:30; cf the same pattern of the end of the age and of Gentile rule and the beginning of the next age, the Messianic Kingdom in Da 7:26-27-note) The sign - Earlier Jesus has referred to the scribes and Pharisees who had asked for "a sign" as "an evil and adulterous generation." (Mt 12:38-39, cp Mt 16:1-4). He did not rebuke the disciples' request for a sign, for their request was not a manifestation of unbelief but of belief. They believed He was coming again and His coming would be associated with the end of the age. They wanted a warning sign regarding the coming events which they clearly believed would soon come to pass. The parallel passage to Mt 24:3 in found in Mark 13:4 which reads... "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are going to be fulfilled?" Sign (4592)(semeion akin to semaino = to give a sign; sema = a sign) is a distinguishing mark by which something is known, an object, quality, or event whose presence or occurrence indicates the probable presence or occurrence of something else. Below are the three questions (or two questions with the second having two parts) and the signs that signify they are about to take place. Notice that Matthew and Mark do not record the disciples asking Jesus for a sign regarding the destruction of the Temple. However, Luke 21:6-7 records "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down." And they questioned Him, saying, "Teacher, when therefore will these things be? And what will be the sign when these things (What things? Lk 21:6 in context = utter destruction of the Temple) are about to take place?"" Note that the sign in Luke 21:20 is not the same as the sign in Mt 24:15. They are clearly distinctly different signs and to attempt to say they are identical signs is an example of not letting the plain sense of the Scriptures say what they say. The result of course will be an incorrect interpretation. To reiterate, Matthew 24 is indeed a difficult prophecy but the three signs are not difficult to identify unless one comes to the text with a preconceived bias or a desire to make Jesus' words fit one's particular system of theological interpretation. And if one fails to read the text literally, a difficult prophecy becomes even more difficult to accurately interpret! THREE SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS** THREE SURE SIGNS The Prophetic Event The Sign The Timing The Scripture (1) Desolation of Jerusalem Destruction of Temple WHEN YOU SEE... Jerusalem Surrounded by Armies Fulfilled 70AD Luke 21:20 (2) The End of the Age WHEN YOU SEE... Abomination of Desolation Standing in the Holy Place Yet Future Matthew 24:15 (3) The Second Coming THE SIGN... The Son of Man Coming in the clouds Yet Future Matthew 24:30 ** Events (2) and (3) are linked because the Second Coming marks the "end of the age" thus many writers say the disciples asked only two questions, the second having two components. The end of the age - KJV has "end of the world" but as
Mateus 24:1-14
Constable - The Jews believed that a seven-year period of time will immediately precede Messiah's coming to rule the world. "Our Rabbis taught: In the seven-year cycle at the end of which the son of David will come . . . at the conclusion of the septennate the son of David will come." "The idea became entrenched that the coming of the Messiah will be preceded by greatly increased suffering . . . This will last seven years. And then, unexpectedly, the Messiah will come." "A prominent feature of Jewish eschatology, as represented especially by the rabbinic literature, was the time of trouble preceding Messiah's coming. It was called 'the birth pangs of the Messiah,' sometimes more briefly translated as 'the Messianic woes.'" The Jews believed that a seven-year period of time will immediately precede Messiah's coming to rule the world. "Our Rabbis taught: In the seven-year cycle at the end of which the son of David will come . . . at the conclusion of the septennate the son of David will come." "The idea became entrenched that the coming of the Messiah will be preceded by greatly increased suffering . . . This will last seven years. And then, unexpectedly, the Messiah will come." "A prominent feature of Jewish eschatology, as represented especially by the rabbinic literature, was the time of trouble preceding Messiah's coming. It was called 'the birth pangs of the Messiah,' sometimes more briefly translated as 'the Messianic woes.'" Wycliffe Bible Commentary - Daniel's seventieth week has two clearly marked halves (Dan 9:27). There is an amazing correspondence between the order of the seals in Rev 6 and the order of events in Mt 24:4-14. Thus these verses must be placed in the first three and one-half years of the Tribulation, after the Church has been raptured. 5. Saying, I am Christ (cf. Rev 6:1, 2; first seal: Anti-christ). Though such tendencies may develop during the church age (I Jn 4:3), the specific reference is to the final Antichrist and his associates. There is no record of any person's claiming to be Christ between A.D. 30 and 70. 6. Wars and rumors of wars (cf. Rev 6:3, 4; second seal: warfare). 7. Famines (cf. Rev 6:5, 6 third seal: famine). Pestilences and earthquakes ( Cf. Rev 6:7, 8; fourth seal: death for one-fourth of the earth). 8. Beginning of sorrows. Literally, of birthpains, suggesting the travail shortly to be followed by a happier day. 9. Shall kill you (cf. Rev 6:9-11; fifth seal: martyrs). 11. Many false prophets . . . shall deceive many. Cf. II Thess 2:8-12. 12. The love of many shall wax cold. The severity of these calamities will cause the majority of Israel to abandon any pretense of piety. 13. But the distinguishing mark of the saved Jewish remnant will be their enduring in faith to the end. 14. Gospel of the kingdom. The good news of salvation in the Messiah, with the emphasis that the Messianic kingdom is about to be established. This message will go into all the world during the Tribulation through the efforts of the two witnesses (Rev 11:3-12) and the sealed remnant of Israel (Rev 7). (4) Interpret the events in Mt 24:4-14 as fulfilled in the past. They interpret Mt 24:15 as fulfilled in the past They interpret the phrase "the end" as a reference to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. R. T. France (The Gospel of Matthew - NICNT) - "(Comment on Mt 24:6) The period from the 30s to the 60s (Ed: Speaking of 30-60 AD) was relatively peaceful in the Roman empire as a whole, but in the east there were wars with Parthia in and after AD 36, and a more local war between Antipas and the Nabatean king Aretas in which the Romans became involved in AD 36-37...the disciples must not get things out of perspective, or be panicked into imagining that "the end" is imminent (Ed: For France "the end" is the destruction of the Temple)....The question which Jesus is here answering was about when the temple would be destroyed, and that is the "end" most naturally understood here....(Comment on Mt 24:7) Such historical records as we have for the first century mention earthquakes in Asia Minor in AD 61and in Italy in AD 62, in Jerusalem in AD 67, and another serious earthquake at an unspecified earlier date in Palestine. A widespread famine around AD 46 is mentioned in Acts 11:28.....(Comment on Mt 24:8) In later rabbinic literature the phrase "the labor pain (always singular) of the Messiah" comes to be used almost as a technical term for the period of suffering preceding the Messiah's coming...It gains its sense from the context, and the context here is of the suffering of Jerusalem which will be more fully described in Mt 24:15-22....(Comment on Mt 24:13) whoever stands firm throughout the historical process which will culminate in the destruction of the Temple will be saved. in the destruction of the temple will be saved. But it is not easy to see what sort of "salvation" fits that scenario. (Ed: Could it be that it is difficult to see because the interpretation is incorrect?).....(Comment on Mt 24:14) This saying ("The gospel...preached in the whole world for a witness to all the nations") comes unexpectedly here, not only because it provides a note of hope and triumph in an otherwise threatening context, but also because, like Mt 26:13, it already envisages a world-wide proclamation of the good news. (Ed: France is forced to jettison for a moment his historical past fulfillment stance writing)...the implication seems to be that the "end" will not come until the proclamation has already reached "all over the world." (Bolding added) Albert
Mateus 24:4-8
Constable - The Jews believed that a seven-year period of time will immediately precede Messiah’s coming to rule the world. “Our Rabbis taught: In the seven-year cycle at the end of which the son of David will come . . . at the conclusion of the septennate the son of David will come.” “The idea became entrenched that the coming of the Messiah will be preceded by greatly increased suffering . . . This will last seven years. And then, unexpectedly, the Messiah will come.” “A prominent feature of Jewish eschatology, as represented especially by the rabbinic literature, was the time of trouble preceding Messiah’s coming. It was called ‘the birth pangs of the Messiah,’ sometimes more briefly translated as ‘the Messianic woes.’” The Jews believed that a seven-year period of time will immediately precede Messiah’s coming to rule the world. “Our Rabbis taught: In the seven-year cycle at the end of which the son of David will come . . . at the conclusion of the septennate the son of David will come.” “The idea became entrenched that the coming of the Messiah will be preceded by greatly increased suffering . . . This will last seven years. And then, unexpectedly, the Messiah will come.” “A prominent feature of Jewish eschatology, as represented especially by the rabbinic literature, was the time of trouble preceding Messiah’s coming. It was called ‘the birth pangs of the Messiah,’ sometimes more briefly translated as ‘the Messianic woes.’” Wycliffe Bible Commentary - Daniel’s seventieth week has two clearly marked halves (Dan 9:27). There is an amazing correspondence between the order of the seals in Rev 6 and the order of events in Mt 24:4-14. Thus these verses must be placed in the first three and one-half years of the Tribulation, after the Church has been raptured. 5. Saying, I am Christ (cf. Rev 6:1, 2; first seal: Antichrist). Though such tendencies may develop during the church age (I Jn 4:3), the specific reference is to the final Antichrist and his associates. There is no record of any person’s claiming to be Christ between A.D. 30 and 70. 6. Wars and rumors of wars (cf. Rev 6:3, 4; second seal: warfare). 7. Famines (cf. Rev 6:5, 6 third seal: famine). Pestilences and earthquakes ( Cf. Rev 6:7, 8; fourth seal: death for one-fourth of the earth). 8. Beginning of sorrows. Literally, of birthpains, suggesting the travail shortly to be followed by a happier day. 9. Shall kill you (cf. Rev 6:9-11; fifth seal: martyrs). 11. Many false prophets . . . shall deceive many. Cf. 2Thess 2:8-12. 12. The love of many shall wax cold. The severity of these calamities will cause the majority of Israel to abandon any pretense of piety. 13. But the distinguishing mark of the saved Jewish remnant will be their enduring in faith to the end. 14. Gospel of the kingdom. The good news of salvation in the Messiah, with the emphasis that the Messianic kingdom is about to be established. This message will go into all the world during the Tribulation through the efforts of the two witnesses (Rev 11:3-12) and the sealed remnant of Israel (Rev 7). (5) Interpretation of the events in Mt 24:4-14 as fulfilled in the past. These commentators generally interpret Mt 24:15 as fulfilled in the past. And they also interpret the phrase "the end" as a reference to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, not a reference to the end of the age (see context = Mt 24:3-note). R. T. France (The Gospel of Matthew - NICNT) - "(Comment on Mt 24:6) The period from the 30s to the 60s (Ed: Speaking of 30-60 AD) was relatively peaceful in the Roman empire as a whole, but in the east there were wars with Parthia in and after AD 36, and a more local war between Antipas and the Nabatean king Aretas in which the Romans became involved in AD 36–37...the disciples must not get things out of perspective, or be panicked into imagining that “the end” is imminent (Ed: For France "the end" is the destruction of the Temple)....The question which Jesus is here answering was about when the temple would be destroyed, and that is the “end” most naturally understood here....(Comment on Mt 24:7) Such historical records as we have for the first century mention earthquakes in Asia Minor in AD 61and in Italy in AD 62, in Jerusalem in AD 67, and another serious earthquake at an unspecified earlier date in Palestine. A widespread famine around AD 46 is mentioned in Acts 11:28.....(Comment on Mt 24:8) In later rabbinic literature the phrase “the labor pain (always singular) of the Messiah” comes to be used almost as a technical term for the period of suffering preceding the Messiah’s coming...It gains its sense from the context, and the context here is of the suffering of Jerusalem which will be more fully described in Mt 24:15–22....(Comment on Mt 24:13) whoever stands firm throughout the historical process which will culminate in the destruction of the Temple will be saved. in the destruction of the temple will be saved. But it is not easy to see what sort of “salvation” fits that scenario. (Ed: Could it be that it is difficult to see because the interpretation is incorrect?).....(Comment on Mt 24:14) This saying ("The gospel...preached in the whole world for a witness to all the nations") comes unexpectedly here, not only because it provides a note of hope and triumph in an otherwise threatening context, but also because, like Mt 26:13, it already envisages a world-wide proclamation of the good news. (Ed: France is forced to jettison for a moment his historical past fulfillment stance writing)...the implication seems to be that the “end” will not come until the proclamation has already reached “all over the world.”" (Bolding added) D A Carson - all things (vv. 5–7) are signs that Jesus is coming back, and they all will be manifest before the generation Jesus was addressing had died. (Referring to those who lived in the first century). (Expositor's Bible Commentary) David Platt (who interprets the abomination of Mt 24:15 as the Roman army in 70AD) - Jesus begins talking about true and false signs pointing to Jerusalem's destruction in Mt 24:4-14. (Christ Centered Exposition) Albert
Mateus 24:15
Constable - "Therefore" or "So" (Gr. oun) ties pericope very closely to the preceding one. (Matthew 24 Commentary - Expository Notes) Hiebert comments - "Jesus describes the end-time crisis, the sign that the disciples had asked for (Mt 24:3). They were ardently hoping that their Master would speedily establish His earthly kingdom (Ed: see their question in Acts 1:6, cf Lk 19:11). Their views of the future were still essentially Jewish, and they conceived of the anticipated Messianic Kingdom in relation to the people of Israel. As yet, they had no clear concept of the coming church. If Jesus had spoken to them of the rapture in the future, He would only have added confusion to the limited understanding they had of what He had already said." (Ed: As an aside, most commentators agree that there is no mention of the Rapture in Matthew 24-25.) (The Gospel of Mark- An Expositional Commentary- D. Edmond Hiebert) SUMMARY INTERPRETATION Here is my summary interpretation of Mt 24:15 which will be explained in more detail in the remainder of the comments and compared with other interpretations. This summary is based primarily on simple observation of the Scripture, reading the text for the plain sense (literally), not looking for hidden meanings and comparing the text with related or parallel Scriptures to help understand Jesus' intended meaning. This summary is not based on a specific system of interpretation. Even though some might say the summary sounds like a dispensational interpretation, I am not a dispensationalist. That said, without further qualification, here is the summary of Matthew 24:15 (Note: the "+" identifies a link to notes related to the passage): Jesus has just ended Mt 24:14-note with the words "the end" (the very last Greek word in Mt 24:14) and now responds to the disciples' initial request for a sign (Mt 24:3+) by giving them a very unique sign which will mark the beginning of the end of this age (Mt 24:3+). And so Jesus describes a specific sign, one which has not occurred in the past (but which had been foreshadowed-see Da 8:13, Da 11:31), and which will literally be fulfilled in the future. Recall that a sign is something that one can see which points to something else. In Mt 24:15 Jesus says "when you see" indicating that this is a visible sign. He explains that the sign is the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place. He also explains that study of the book of Daniel will help the reader understand the sign. The Temple was destroyed in 70AD, but Jesus says the sign is of some one or some thing standing in the Temple (holy place). Of course the problem with Jesus' prophecy is that there is currently no Temple. It follows that the Jewish Temple must be rebuilt in Jerusalem (see note). If God can cause the nation of Israel to be reborn in May, 1948 against all odds, then a rebuilt Temple will not be too difficult for Him (Jer 32:17+, Jer 32:27+). Does this take faith to accept? Of course it does, but the assurance of things hoped for and the conviction of things not seen (a rebuilt Temple, Heb 11:1+) are based not on an active imagination but on our faithful God (Lam 3:23) and His faith producing Word (Ro 10:17+, cf John's description of the temple in Rev 11:2+, compare Paul's mention of Antichrist taking his seat in the Temple in 2Th 2:3-+, 2Th 2:4+, see note on Tribulation Temple). Daniel 9:27+ describes a prince who is to come (Da 9:26+) who will make a 7 year covenant ("one week" - see Daniel's Seventieth Week) with the "many," the "many" clearly being the Jews in context ("your [Daniel a Jewish man's] people" Da 9:24+). This "prince" is the Antichrist (name used only in 1Jn 2:18+) who Daniel identifies as the "Little Horn" and who rises to power out of a 10 nation confederacy (Daniel 7:8+, cp Da 2:44-45+ where "the days of those kings" = "10 toe stage" [Da 2:42+] = 10 horns = 10 kings - cp Da 7:24+). The first 3.5 years, his devilish character is not obvious (see note on Rev 6:2), but in the middle of the 7 year "peace" covenant, he breaks the covenant with Israel and puts a stop to sacrifices and offerings in the rebuilt Temple (Da 9:27+) fulfilling Jesus' prophecy in Mt 24:15. Daniel says he also (as the "Little Horn") will overpower 3 of the original 10 members of the confederacy (Da 7:8+, Da 7:20+). Paul adds that the Antichrist (aka "man of lawlessness...son of perdition") will go into the "holy place," the rebuilt Temple, and take "his seat in the Temple of God, displaying himself as being God." (" 2Th 2:3+, 2Th 2:4+, cp Da 11:36 2Th 2:3- 2Th 2:3- 2Th 2:3-+) In so doing he will commit the abomination that makes the Temple desolate. Note that this sign is not the Roman army surrounding Jerusalem in the past (70AD - cp Lk 21:20+), but a real person who will commit a real act of defilement (abomination) of the Jewish Temple in the future. At this same time, in the midpoint of the 7 year covenant, the Antichrist (aka "The Beast") is empowered by the dragon (the devil) for 42 months or the last 3.5 years of the 7 year period (Rev 13:4-5+) However, since it is unlikely the Antichrist will personally remain standing in the holy place, it is more likely that it is his image which the false prophet creates and commands the world to worship, which will remain standing in the holy place (cp Rev 13:14-15+, Rev 14:9, 11+, Rev 16:2+, Rev 19:20+, contrast Rev 20:4+) During this last 3.5 years, the Antichrist will begin to pursue and persecute the Jews, which is the impetus for Jesus taking five verses to command and convince the Jews to flee when they see the sign of the abomination of desolation! During his last 3.5 years of the Seventieth Week, the Antichrist "will speak out against the Most High (beginning in Mt 24:15, 2Th 2:4 2Th 2:4, blaspheming God - Rev 13:6+, cp his great, boasts - Da 7:8+, Da 7:11+, Da 7:20+) and wear down the saints of the Highest One, with the intent to make alterations in times and in law (cp Da 9:27+ "stop to sacrifice and grain offering"); and they (the Jews) will be given into his hand for a time, times, and half a time." (Da 7:25+ = Da 7:21+ = the Little Horn who "was waging war with the [Jewish] saints and overpowering them") In other words, after the Antichrist breaks his covenant with the Jews, they will be given into his hand for "time, times and half a time" (3.5 years, John says 1260 days in Rev 12:6+, which he repeats in Rev 12:14+ = "time, times, and half a time" = 42 months). John records "it was given to him (the Antichrist) to make war with the saints (the Jews first, but then to all who refuse to worship his image - Rev 13:15+) and to overcome them; and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him." (Rev 13:7+) For how long? Three and one-half years beginning with the unmistakably clear sign in Mt 24:15 which inaugurates the time Jesus calls the "Great Tribulation" (Mt 24:21+ = Mk 13:19 = the "time of Jacob's distress" = Jer 30:7+) a time "such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall," a time which Daniel describes as "a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time" (Da 12:1+) but a time which "shall be cut short" (Mt 24:22) after "a time, times, and half a time" (Da 12:7+), during which "many (Jews) will be purged, purified and refined." (Da 12:10+, cf Zech 13:8, 9, Zech 12:10, Ro 11:26-27+) God will allow the Antichrist 1260 days (42 months) to do his worst, but not one day longer, because the true Christ will return and bring that Lawless One "to an end by the appearance of His coming" (2Thes 2:7-8, 9-10). Then the true Christ will fulfill many OT prophecies (Amos 9:11,12, Jer 30:9+, Jer 31:28+, Jer 32:42, 43+, Jer 33:14, 15, 16+, Ezek 37:22, 23, 24, 25+, Zech 14:11, 16, 17), and set up His 1000 year Kingdom on earth (cp Acts 1:6, 15:13-14, 15-18, Lk 19:11 Rev 20:4-5+), demonstrating God's best after 3.5 years of Satan's worst! Indeed, "Then the sovereignty, the dominion, and the greatness of all the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be given to the people of the saints of the Highest One; His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all the dominions will serve and obey Him." (Da 7:27+) Ray
Mateus 24:15
Constable - The abomination of desolation "describes something that because of its abominable character causes the godly to desert the temple on its account." D A Carson says the abomination of desolation "means "the abomination characterized by desolation," leaving it unclear whether the abomination "causes" desolation (NIV; cf. McNeile, "the abominable thing that layeth waste"; RSV, "the desolating sacrilege") or is simply a token of it. The former is more likely. The expression occurs four times in Daniel (Da 8:13; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). (Expositor's Bible Commentary) (Bolding added) R C H Lenski on abomination of desolation - "Abomination" is the main term, something that is utterly abominable in God's sight, and this will occur right in the Temple that is consecrated to God. The genitive "of desolation" characterizes the abomination according to the effect it must produce, namely desolate the desecrated Temple, leave it empty of worshippers. The moment the believers see this (and it is something unmistakable and easy to see) they are to flee the country posthaste. (The Interpretation of St Matthew's Gospel) Note that Lenski (who interprets Mt 24:15 as fulfilled in 70AD) reads "holy place" literally recognizing the abomination as something that "will occur right in the Temple" and also acknowledges that the abomination will be a clear, visible warning, one which allows those who see it time to flee the fury that follows! So what is the sign? What is the abomination of desolation that makes desolate and serves as a signal to those who see it to flee? While there are many interpretations of the identity of the abomination of desolation (including Pilate, Caligula, Hadrian, etc) there really only 3 main interpretations, and remember only one can be the correct interpretation. (1) The Future Antichrist - This is only futuristic interpretation and it refers either to the Antichrist himself and/or his blasphemous image. (2) The Roman Army - This is by far the most popular interpretation, but as will be shown below is also the most improbable interpretation! Most commentators base this interpretation on Luke's similar (but note carefully -- not identical) description in Luke 21:20-24. See Chart comparing and contrasting the descriptions by Luke and Matthew. Most Bible Dictionaries favor this interpretation (Easton, Smith, but the Morrish Dictionary is an exception) (3) The Jewish Zealots - "Shortly before A.D. 70 the Zealots were in the temple precincts during the war with Rome, and their presence could have been considered a desecration." (Reformation Study Bible) Henry Alford holds this view (Ref). Why would the Zealots be offered as a candidate for the abomination? It is because these commentators recognize the problem of identifying the Roman Army as the abomination and understand it could not possibly be the Roman Army because it would have been too late to flee the city once the Army had broken into the city. All of the most "highly acclaimed" commentaries on Matthew interpret the abomination in light of Luke 21:20-24 and thus usually interpret the abomination as the Roman Army. A survey of Matthew commentaries written prior to 1900 as show that almost all of these commentaries also identify the abomination of desolation as the Roman Army and very few even mention the possibility that this might be related to the Antichrist (Trapp is an exception). The paucity of older (and even newer) commentaries that mention the possibility that the Antichrist is the abomination of desolation is surprising in light of the fact that "the earliest and best supported identification equates this desecration with the Antichrist. As early as Hippolytus (170-235AD; click for eschatology of Hippolytus) and Irenaeus, (130-202AD) 2Th 2:3-note, 2Th 2:4-note had been associated with Mk 13:14. This adversary (1) exalts himself and opposes everything connected with God, (2) sits in the sanctuary of God, and (3) proclaims that he is God. Since Mark had used a masculine participle, hestēkóta, where the antecedent would normally have demanded a neuter, this connection seems secure." (ISBE, revised edition) (Related resource: References to the Antichrist in the Early Church) Some like Albert Barnes (published in the 1880's) flat out stated "The abomination of desolation means the Roman army, and is so explained by Luke 21:20." One modern writer, Larry Chouinard, has an interesting comment on the identification of the abomination writing - Some have speculated that the presence of Roman soldiers and the planting of their shields in the temple precincts might be the detestable act that will signal the necessity of flight. However, once the Romans had entered the city and planted their shields on holy ground it would have been too late to safely flee the city (see Josephus, J.W. 6.6.1, 316). Other attempts to identify some specific event that might be understood as the "desolating sacrilege" can at best be viewed only as guesswork. The most that can be said is that the disciples were to flee when events associated with the Jewish wars (A.D. 66-70) so compromised the sanctity of the temple that its destruction was inevitable. (Matthew, College Press, 1997) Can you see the basic flaw in his logic? Jesus is describing a clearly visible sign ("When you see..."), but if it is something that can be "viewed only as guesswork," then it is hardly a reliable sign! A sign points to something, but you have to be able to read and understand (just as Jesus' commanded in Mt 24:15 "let the reader understand") the sign in order to recognize the thing to which it points. So this issue is more than a matter of intellectual debate, for in the future when the abomination stands in the holy place, it is Jesus' clear signal to flee for you life! Adam Clarke also dogmatically states that the "abomination of desolation, St. Luke, (Luke 21:20, 21:21), refers to the Roman army; and this abomination standing in the holy place is the Roman army besieging Jerusalem....The Roman army is called an abomination, for its ensigns and images, which were so to the Jews. Josephus says, (War, b. vi. chap. 6 - see this quote in my comment below), the Romans brought their ensigns into the temple, and placed them over against the eastern gate, and sacrificed to them there. The Roman army is therefore fitly called the abomination, and the abomination which maketh desolate, as it was to desolate and lay waste Jerusalem; and this army besieging Jerusalem is called by St. Mark, Mark 13:14, standing where it ought not, that is, as in the text here, the holy place; as not only the city (Ed: Mt 24:15 makes NO mention of "the city!"), but a considerable compass of ground about it, was deemed holy, and consequently no profane persons should stand on it." (Ref) Comment on Adam Clarke's interpretation - First let's read the quote from Josephus to which Clarke alludes = "And now the Romans, upon the flight of the seditious into the city, and upon the burning of the holy house itself, and of all the buildings round about it, brought their ensigns (See Kitto's diagrams) to the temple, (18) and set them over-against its eastern gate. And there (Ed: Where? At the Eastern Gate!) did they offer sacrifices to them: and there did they make Titus Imperator (19) with the greatest acclamations of joy." (Josephus- Of the War, Book VI. Chapter 6.1) What do you observe about the sequence of events? Note that the "holy house itself and all of the buildings round about" was burned. You may be asking "So what?" Well, the point is that Jesus clearly stated the abomination would stand in the holy place, but that is a problem, because there was no holy place in which the ensigns could be standing! Jesus' words literally interpreted are thus not fulfilled by the placement of the ensigns "over-against its eastern gate." You may say that is simply semantics but the simple fact is that these sacrifices, as abominable as they were, were NOT performed in the holy place because the holy place had been burned! Words mean something and the point is that Jesus' words are not fulfilled by the Roman Army according to Josephus' description (see following discussion). WHY THE ABOMINATION IS NOT THE ROMAN ARMY It is surprising that so many writers interpret the Roman army as the entity which Jesus predicted would be "standing in the holy place," the Jewish Temple (Mt 24:15)! Below is a summary of the reasons that illustrate why such an interpretation is very unlikely. (1) If one reads Jesus' words literally, the interpretation of the Roman Army as the abomination is not even logical. Why? Because it is not even a physical possibility--there would not be enough room for the Roman army to stand IN the Temple! Of course commentators are forced to "interpolate" Jesus' words and say He did not mean the Temple proper but the Temple grounds, or something to this effect. (2) Jesus clearly stated the abomination will be standing in the holy place. He did not say it would be encircling or surrounding the city. Standing (Mt 24:15) and surrounded (Lk 21:20) are distinct, different verbs indicating different actions. (3) Jesus did not generalize and say the abomination would occur in the city of Jerusalem. but clearly stated that the abomination would take place in the holy place, the Jewish Temple. (4) Compare the parallel passage in Mark: "the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be." (Mk 13:14ESV) Comment: Notice that the ESV does have have "standing where it" but "standing where he" which is an accurate translation of the Greek verb standing which is masculine gender and singular. It would be difficult to say this "he" of Mk 13:14ESV is the Roman Army! It follows that Mark's use of the masculine singular to describe the abomination is much more compatible with an individual rather than an army! Indeed, the well respected ESV Study Bible note on Mark 13:14ESV reads "The abomination of desolation (cf. Dan. 9:27; 11:31; 12:11) points to the Antichrist's ultimate desecration of God's temple." (Bolding added for emphasis) (5) Jesus refers the reader to Daniel, explaining that Daniel spoke about the abomination. In light of Jesus' recommendation, it is notable that Daniel spoke extensively about the Antichrist in chapters 7, 9 and 11 (the "Little Horn", "the Beast," "the King"). So this begs the question, did Daniel speak about the Roman army? While the King James Version has a translation note on Da 9:27 that says "with the abominable armies," the Hebrew word this marginal NOTE (not the actual translation) translates as "armies" is kanaph which is better translated wing. In fact not one of the 85 uses of kanaph in the Old Testament is translated as army in either the NAS [bird*(1), corner(1), corners(4), covering(1), each other(1), edge(5), edges(1), ends(3), fold(2), garment(1), kind(3), skirt(3), skirts(1), sorts(1), wing(14), winged(5), wings(58), wings were each other(1), wingspan(1).] or the KJV (wing 74, skirt 14, borders 2, corners 2, ends 2, feathered 2, sort 2, winged 2, misc 8)! In sum, to appeal to the lone KJV translation NOTE which is not found in any other version is tenuous, especially if one seeks to use this point as a major argument that Mt 24:15 is a description of the Roman army. (6) By the time the Roman Army was "standing" in the holy place, it would have been too late to flee. (See also point #7) Many of the commentaries which favor a 70AD interpretation of Mt 24:15 are forced to admit that this fact creates a serious problem with their interpretation. For example, the Pulpit Commentary writes "If the Temple itself is meant (referring to the phrase "holy place"), it is plain that it would be too late to fly from that doomed city when the Roman eagles were already in the hallowed courts." The respected theologian D A Carson (discussed more below) states "The obvious occasion (Ed: of the occurrence of the abomination of desolation), in general terms, is AD 70, though certain difficulties must be faced." Carson explains one serious difficulty with a 70AD interpretation writing that "by the time the Romans had actually desecrated the Temple in AD 70, it was too late for anyone in the city to flee." John Broadus recognizing problem #6, writes "Holy place cannot well mean distinctively the temple in this case, for when the Roman standards stood in the temple it was too late for fleeing to the mountain." (Ref) Broadus makes at least two errors. (1) As discussed in #7 the Roman standards were never placed in the actual Temple. (2) Broadus is so committed to the 70AD interpretation that he is willing to say holy place does not really mean holy place, the Temple! Beloved, Jesus was very clear about where the abomination of desolation would stand, unless one seeks to attribute to Mt 24:15 an interpretation which Jesus never intended! (7) Josephus writes that when the city walls were finally scaled, the Temple itself was actually burned. Therefore it would not have been possible for the Roman Army to place their idolatrous ensigns in the holy place. In fact Josephus says that they placed them against the gate on the East. The gate on the East is NOT the holy place. (See Josephus- Of the War, Book 6. Chapter 6. Paragraph 1 ) (8) Josephus records that Titus had a "retaining wall" constructed around Jerusalem prior to entering the city which would have removed all hope of escape for Jews still in the city. (See Josephus' record) Notice that this retaining wall was built before the Roman Army even broke through the walls of Jerusalem, before the Roman Army could even have stood in the holy place! Another historical fact recorded by Thoralf Gilbrant is that "the Romans cut down every tree within a mile of Jerusalem, so there would be no cover to help people escape or to allow food or supplies to be brought in. Thus the conditions mentioned in this verse fit the later time of tribulation foretold in the Book of Revelation and in Daniel 9 (Daniel's 70th Week), rather than 70 AD." (The Complete Biblical Library: The New Testament Study Bible - Matthew). (9) Another reason that the Roman Army is unlikely the abomination in Mt 24:15 is that as Jesus presents the sign, the sign seems to happen rather abruptly, which implies that it will take the spectators by surprise. And yet clearly there was no surprise when the Romans advanced and began to lay siege to the city for seven months before its fall in September, AD 70. Admittedly this argument is somewhat "softer," but still has merit. David
Mateus 24:15
Constable remarks on those who hold that this prophecy was fulfilled "when the Romans brought their standards bearing the image of Caesar into the temple and offered sacrifices to their gods they set up the abomination that Daniel predicted. The main problem with this view is that Jesus told the Jews living in Jerusalem and Judea to flee when the abomination appeared in the temple (Mt 24:16-20). However when the Romans finally desecrated the temple in 70 A.D. most of the Jews had already left Jerusalem and Judea." (Emphasis added) (Matthew 24 Commentary) Ron Bigalke notes that "Titus did not enter the city of Jerusalem until after the construction of his wall and the famine consumed the Jews. Therefore, it would be impossible to heed the commands of Jesus to flee the city because of witnessing the abomination of desolation spoken in Matthew 24:15 (Ed comment: Bigalke is saying the preterist interpretation that the Roman army is the abomination in Mt 24:15 does not allow the inhabitants to flee!). It should be mentioned again that any sacrilege on the part of the Romans was after the city and Temple were destroyed." (Preterism And Antiquity- Was Preterism a View of the Early Church) (3) This point is somewhat similar to the previous one but has slightly different emphasis. It is notable that not once did Josephus (The Wars of the Jews) record an "abomination of desolation" in the holy place PRIOR to the Temple's destruction (as a literal reading of Mt 24:15 would demand). In fact AFTER the Temple was destroyed Josephus wrote "And now the Romans, upon the flight of the seditious into the city, and upon the burning of the holy house itself, and of all the buildings round about it, brought their ensigns to the temple, and set them over against its eastern gate; and there did they offer sacrifices to them, and there did they make Titus imperator, with the greatest acclamations of joy [Josephus- Of the War, Book 6. Chapter 6. Paragraph 1]." In other words the holy place was no longer intact when the Romans offered sacrifices to their pagan gods. It is also worth noting that the Christian historian Phillip Schaff alluded to the preceding quote by Josephus in his multi-volume History of the Christian Church writing "Thus was fulfilled the prophecy concerning the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place." Notice that either Schaff misquoted Josephus or he offered his own conclusion in an attempt to validate his belief that the "abomination of desolation" Jesus description in Mt 24:15 was committed by the Romans in 70AD. But Josephus never made that statement! Not only does a non-literal approach necessitate twisting of the inspired Scriptures, but also frequently involves distortion of secular historical records! (4) If the elect are Christians who escaped to Pella in the Transjordan as described in extra-biblical literature, what need would there have been for shortening of those days (Mt 24:22)? In other words, those who had heeded Jesus' warning in Luke 21:20-note (which I believe does indeed refer to the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem - see explanation) had already fled and thus preserved their lives. (5) Mt 24:29-30 states that Jesus returns immediately after the Great Tribulation. If Mt 24:15-28 was fulfilled in 70 AD, one would have to totally spiritualize Jesus' words and say that He came spiritually but not visibly, which is what preterist interpretations are forced to do. R C Sproul (see note below) for example writes "The great tribulation refers to the siege of Jerusalem." (He is referring to 70AD). But a normal reading of the text does not leave room for spiritualization of Jesus' Second Coming! Notice Jesus' words in Mt 24:27 "For just as the lightning comes from the east, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be." What is He saying? Is He describing something that is not normally visible to all who have eyes to see? Of course He is. He is saying very plainly that the coming of the Son of Man will be a visible event, like lightning when it lights up the entire sky! And in Mt 24:30 He describes "the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory." That sounds like an event which is visible. The plain reading indicates a literal, visible return, just as the angel had promised in Acts 1:11 and as John attested to in Revelation writing that at the return of Jesus "every eye will see Him" (Rev 1:7-note). Beloved, He did not return immediately after the events described in Mt 24:15-28! Related Resource: See Tony Garland's refutation of R C Sproul's unusual teachings on the last days (6) Mt 24:14-note speaks of the end of this age ("then the end shall come") which is connected to the following section (Mt 24:15-28) with a "therefore ("So when" - ESV, NET, NIV)" It follows that Jesus' description in Mt 24:14-28 is also related to the end of this age. If one holds that Matthew 24 was fulfilled in the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem in 70AD, it would be very difficult to explain Mt 24:15-28. (7) In Matthew the abomination comes first (Mt 24:15), and then is followed by the Tribulation (Mt 24:21). In 70AD the siege of Titus which many interpret as the abomination was contemporaneous with the great distress (Lk 21:23). THE FOLLOWING WRITERS FAVOR MATTHEW 24:15-26 AS A FUTURE EVENT Thomas Constable - There are several reasons why the abomination of desolation must be a future event in God's eschatological program. First, verse 15 is in a context of verses that describes events that have not yet happened (vv. 14-21; cf. v. 29). Second, Daniel's seventieth week with its unique tribulation has not yet happened. Third, Mark described Jesus saying that the abomination of desolation would stand (masculine participle estekota) as a person who set himself up as God in the temple (Mark 13:14). This has never happened since Jesus made this prophecy. Fourth, other later revelation points to the future Antichrist as the abomination of desolation (2Thes 2:3-4; Rev. 13:11-18). (Matthew 24 Commentary) Ray
Mateus 24:37-42
Constable notes that "Some interpreters have made a case for this being a reference to the Rapture because Jesus used two different words for "take" in the context. In Mt 24:39 the Greek verb is airo whereas in Mt 24:40, 41 He used paralambano. The argument is that paralambano is a word that describes Jesus taking His own to Himself. However it also occurs in a bad sense (Mt 4:5, 8; Jn 19:16)." (Matthew 24 - Expository Notes) Charles Ryrie - The ones taken will be taken to judgment and death. The ones left will be left to enter the blessings of the millennial kingdom. (Ryrie study Bible: New American Standard Bible) Two men in the field - They may be fathers and son, brothers, lifelong friends, but they will soon be separated! Why? Because one has through grace placed their faith in Jesus Christ for their eternal salvation, and the other one has rejected Christ's offer of salvation. This division will not be a temporary but a permanent eternal separation! And when does this forever separation transpire? When Jesus returns at a time unknown to both parties. One is spiritually alive and prepared, while the other is spiritually dead and bankrupt. One will be taken - Although paralambano means to take to one's self and to seize for one's own possession, and is usually used in a good sense (eg Jn 14:3), in Mt 24:40 the context is not good so that this is clearly not a proof text to support the Rapture of the saints as some commentators state! The one… taken will be taken to judgment and eternal punishment (Second Death). The one… left will enter into the blessings of the Millennial Kingdom. When Noah entered the ark who was left on the earth after the flood? The believers were the only ones to survive the flood (the ones not taken) Only those in the ark were safe, which is a beautiful metaphor for believers today who are IN CHRIST, eternally secure "in the Ark" so to speak! Stuart Weber on one taken… one left - "Everyone needs to heed these warnings." One of each pair was prepared because he or she knew Jesus' teachings, had watched for the signs, and had remained obedient. The other in each pair was unprepared, because he or she had either been ignorant of Jesus' teaching or else simply ignored them and not lived according to the righteous standards of the king and his kingdom. Such people were taken from the scene when the king returned to rule. Jesus' point was: be prepared. His arrival will be sudden and unpredictable. (Holman New Testament Commentary) Noah was one left. Why? Was it because Noah was so good? Of course not. Moses records "Then the LORD said to Noah, "Enter the ark, you and all your household; for you alone I have seen to be righteous before Me in this time." (Ge 7:1, Heb 11:7-note = This passage clearly shows how genuine faith is not static but is dynamic and results in obedience. Obedience does not save anyone but it demonstrates that one is genuinely saved. Beloved, if you say you are saved, that you walked an aisle 30 years ago but you having living like the devil ever since, then there is a great likelihood that you will not be on the ark with Noah. You need to repent and confess Jesus as Lord and be born again by His Spirit! Ro 10:9, 10-note, John 3:3-5, Titus 3:5, 6-note, Eph 2:8,9-note) Related studies on faith and obedience: Relationship of faith and obedience - Covenant Obedience of faith - Ro 1:5, 16:25 James 2:14-26 Comments on Faith and Works
Mateus 24:43-51
Constable - The point of this parable is that if a homeowner knows the general time when a thief will break in he will prepare accordingly. The signs of the times during the Tribulation that Jesus revealed (vv. 5-22) will enable believers to know the general time He will return. Consequently believers in the Tribulation should prepare themselves. Allowed (1439)(eao) means to let be, to permit, to allow, to let, not to hinder (Mt 24:43 Lk 4:41 Acts 14:16 Acts 27:32 Acts 28:4 1Co10:13) Robertson on broken into - Dug through the tile roof or under the floor (dirt in the poorer houses). (Word Pictures in the New Testament) Broken into (1358)(diorhusso from dia = through + orusso = to dig) speaks of a thief who gains entrance into a house by digging through a wall and thus breaks in or through (Mt 6:19, Mt 6:20, Mt 24:43, Lk 12:39 = all the uses in the NT). There are 4 uses in the Septuagint - Job 24:16 (describing an adulterer in Job 24:25 "in the dark they dig into houses"), Ezek 12:5, 7, 12 where it means to literally dig a hole through a wall. Liddell-Scott-Jones on diorhusso - dig through, having dug a trench across or along, metaphorically to undermine or ruin (Eccl 5:6). To worm out. To be shut up in a funeral vault. Moulton-Milligan note the exact phrase as used in the Gospels is found in a secular Greek writing - ";because he broke into a house." Jesus may come at any time, so we must be ready all the time. Phil Newton on thieves in the night - Thieves are not accustomed to announcing the place, date, and time of their next heist! They operate by stealth, catching homeowners off guard, breaking in when least expected. It is rather curious that Jesus used such an illustration to help us think about His return. Several of the New Testament writers follow His lead and do the same (1Th 5:2 2Pe 3:10). If you knew that a thief had plans to rob your home at 1:00 AM on Tuesday, you would be ready: phone in hand, lights on, wide-eyed, pacing quietly from window to door, peaking through the blinds, listening to the sound of crunching leaves or breaking twigs near your house. But since you do not know if or when a thief might break in, you still make preparations. You keep your windows and doors locked. You add security measures to the perimeter of your home. You quickly check out any noisy disturbances during the night. You and I do this even though we may never been broken into by thieves. We prepare, just in case of a break-in. Jesus is telling us to prepare for something that is certain. He will return. We do not know the time or day. We cannot pinpoint a spot on a prophetic calendar to give us ease of mind about when He comes. He calls for us to be ready to meet Him at any time. "Be ready," because we do not know when Christ comes, and we do not want Him to return and find us unprepared. Are you prepared to meet Jesus Christ? Do you regularly cultivate your spiritual life so that you are sensitive to anything that might dull you or weaken your passion for Christ? Since we do not know the day of Christ's return, then we must treat everyday as if this might be the day. What changes do you need to make in your spiritual life to live with that kind of mind? Let us take action, for behold, He comes! (Mt 24:36-44 When Will Christ Return?) (Alert, Ready, and Faithful) Alfred Plummer - There are matters in which it suffices to watch by day; at night one may sleep. But the man whose house has been broken into and plundered in the night has to abandon that doctrine, and so must the Christian: comp. 1Th 5:4; 2 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 3:3, 16:15. (An exegetical commentary on the Gospel according to S. Matthew) Matthew 24:44 "For this reason you also must be ready; for the Son of Man is coming at an hour when you do not think He will. : dia touto kai humeis ginesthe (3PPMM) hetoimoi hoti e ou dokeite (2PPAI) hora o huios tou anthropou erchetai (3SPMI): Mt 25:10,13 Lu 12:40 Php 4:5 Jas 5:9 Rev 19:7 READY FOR OUR REDEEMER'S RETURN For this reason (on account of this) (dia touto) - On account of the fact of the uncertainty of the time of the return and the certainty of being caught unprepared if you do not stay on the alert. Must be (1093)(ginomai) means to become, and in this context to become ready. Note that the verb be is in the present imperative which calls for continual attitude, something which is only possible as we continually depend on the enabling power of the Holy Spirit! Don't just grit your teeth and say "I'm going to stay ready!" You don't just need a little "help" or a little push to to speak. You need the Spirit to initiate in your heart a desire and give you the power to carry out the desire (cp Php 2:13-note). Be is in the middle voice, which is reflexive and indicates the subject initiates the action (enabled by the Spirit) and participates in the effects or results of the action. Jesus gave a similar command in Luke 12:40 - You too, be (present imperative) ready (hetoimos); for (term of explanation = explains "Why?") the Son of Man is coming at an hour that you do not expect." John