WARS AND RUMORS

OF WARS
 WARS AND RUMORS
OF WARS

What Jesus Really Said About the End of the Age,

Earthquakes, A Great Tribulation,
Signs in the Heavens, and His Coming

Gary DeMar
AMERICAN VISION PRESS
POWDER SPRINGS, GEORGIA
WARS AND RUMORS OF WARS
What Jesus Really Said About the End of the Age, Earthquakes, A Great
Tribulation, Signs in the Heavens, and His Coming

Copyright © 2017 by Gary DeMar

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or

transmitted in any form or by any means electronic or mechanical,
including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval
system now known or to be invented, without permission in writing from
the author, except by a reviewer who quotes brief passages in connection
with a review written for inclusion in a magazine, newspaper, website, or
broadcast as long as publishing information is included.

ISBN: 978-0-9972402-3-8

Published in the United States of America

The American Vision, Inc.

3150-A Florence Rd.
Powder Springs, GA 30127
www.AmericnVision.org
 CONTENTS

Introduction

ONE Text, Context, Audience

TWO End of the Temple, End of the Age, False Messiahs

THREE Wars, Famines, Plagues, Earthquakes, Signs in

the Heavens

FOUR Betrayal, False Prophets, Lawlessness, Gospel

Preached in the Whole World

FIVE Abomination of Desolation, Fleeing to the

Mountains, Leaving it All Behind

SIX A Great Tribulation

SEVEN No Life Saved, False Christs, In the Wilderness,

Lightning, Coming of the Son of Man

EIGHT Gathering of Eagles, Sun, Moon, Stars, Powers of

Heavens Shaken

NINE Coming of the Son of Man, Fig Tree, Gathering of

the Elect

TEN "This Generation" Not "That Generation"

Conclusion and Summary
 INTRODUCTION

My first introduction to Bible prophecy came by way of Hal Lindsey's Late

Great Planet Earth. That was in 1973 when I was in my final year at
Western Michigan University. Having little knowledge of the Bible, I was
intrigued with the argument of the book and the seemingly incontrovertible
evidence that we were living in the last days. The signs, I was told, were all
around us. It all seemed to make sense until I read the Bible.
As I began reading the New Testament, I came across passages that did
not fit Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth paradigm. Here are three from the
Gospel of Matthew that immediately caught my attention:

• But whenever they persecute you in one city, flee to the next; for
truly I say to you, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel
until the Son of Man comes (Matt. 10:23).

• For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with
His angels, and WILL THEN REPAY EVERY MAN ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS.
Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who
will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His
kingdom (Matt. 16:27-28; Luke 9:26-27).

• Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these
things take place (Matt. 24:34; see 12:39, 41, 42; 23:36; Luke 17:25).

I was perplexed, so I put the study of eschatology on hold for a time until I
got on better scriptural footing. About a year later, the issue became a topic
of discussion since Lindsey's book and others like it were coming off the
presses in record numbers. By then I was a student at Reformed
Theological Seminary (RTS) where I had access to a library. I picked up
William Hendriksen's commentary on Matthew from his multi-volume New
Testament Commentary series. In his more than two pages of explanation as
to why "this generation" does not mean the generation of Jesus' day, he did
not reference a single verse in the synoptic gospels where the same phrase
is used (Matt. 11:16-19;1 12:39,2 41,3 42;4 16:4;5 17:17;6 23:36;7 Mark
8:12; Luke 7:31; 11:29, 30, 31, 32, 50, 51; 17:25; 21:32). Here was his
conclusion:

By no means has it been established that the term "this generation"

must be limited to contemporaries. It can also refer to "this kind of
people"; for example, the Jews, at any time or in any age. Worthy of
the consideration in this connection are such passages as Deut. 32:5,
20; Ps. 12:7; 78:8; etc., where the LXX uses the same word as is here
rendered "generation," but evidently with a meaning that goes beyond
"group of contemporaries."8 Thus even in the New Testament (see
Acts 2:40; Phil. 2:15; Heb. 3:10), though the starting point may well
be a reference to the people of that particular day, this may not be the
entire meaning. So also probably here in Matt. 24:34.9

I could not understand why Hendriksen did not compare how "this
generation" was used in the Gospels. Why did he go to the Old Testament?
Then there is the problem of indicting Jews throughout history for what a
single generation did. Consider this from Anthony Hoekema:

By "this generation," then, Jesus means the rebellious, apostate,

unbelieving Jewish people, as they have revealed themselves in the
past, are revealing themselves in the present, and will continue to
reveal themselves in the future.10

This is an impossible interpretation, both on exegetical and theological

grounds. Peter restricts the historical parameters of judgment by reciting the
charge (Acts 2:23)11 and identifying the only generation that was guilty of
the charge (2:39-40).12 The judgment upon Jerusalem and the destruction of
the temple were the end-points of that generation's judgment. Notice that
there is hope and a way to escape during a time of judgment (Matt. 24:15-
20; Acts 2:39-40).
In his attempt to back up his weak exegetical argument, Hendriksen
writes: "Jesus does not necessarily mean that his disciples shall see all that
has been predicted and is going to take place"13 even though in Matthew
24:33 Jesus says, "you too, when you see all these things, recognize that
He is near, right at the door." It seemed to me at the time that if Jesus had
had a future generation in view, He would have used the far demonstrative
"that" instead of the near demonstrative "this" and never would have said
"when you see."
Hendriksen's comments on Matthew 24:14 were equally weak. He did
not mention that Jesus uses the word oikoumenē (inhabited earth) only once
in Matthew's gospel. Instead of making the connection with how the word
is used to describe a limited geographical area like the political boundary of
the Roman Empire, as the word is used in Luke 2:1, Acts 11:28, and other
places in the New Testament (Luke 4:5; Acts 17:6, 31; 19:27; Rom. 10:18;
Heb. 1:6; 2:5; Rev. 3:10; 16:14), he avoids even mentioning that oikoumenē
is used rather than kosmos ("world"). It's surprising that with all the work
being done in this area, commentators continue to avoid the obvious.14
For example, Arno C. Gaebelein's 1910 rambling dispensation-al
commentary dismisses without argument any contrary view; Ed Glasscock's
commentary in the Moody Gospel Commentary series (1997) assumes a
futurist view of Matthew 24:14 with no consideration of how the New
Testament uses oikoumenē in other contexts; Leon Morris's The Gospel
According to Matthew (Eerdmans, 1992) does not discuss oikoumenē; Craig
S. Keener's massive Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Eerdmans,
1999) and his abridged commentary for InterVarsity Press (1997) assume a
futurist view with no discussion of oikoumenē except in a footnote.
Dispensationalist Stanley D. Toussaint avoids any discussion of
oikoumenē in his Behold the King: A Study of Matthew (Multnomah, 1980)
and in his unpublished paper "A Critique of the Preterist View of the Olivet
Discourse" (no date).
John F. Walvoord's Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come (Moody, 1974), says
nothing about oikoumenē and its possible relation to an AD 70 fulfillment,
and there is no discussion of verse 14 in his The Prophecy Knowledge
Handbook which claims to include "all the prophecies of Scriptures"
(Victor, 1990); while Lutheran scholar R.C.H. Lenski does mention that
oikoumenē is used, there is no discussion of its possible significance
(Augsburg, 1943).
The dispensational Liberty Bible Commentary (1982) defaults to an end-
time, pre-tribulational "rapture" reading of the text; the same is true for
Louis Barbieri's exposition of Matthew in the Bible Knowledge
Commentary (Victor, 1983); J. Barton Payne's only comment on Matthew
24:14 in his 754-page Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy is that it refers to
"universal gospel preaching" (Harper & Row, 1973). Similarly, the note in
The Nelson Study Bible (1997) does not mention the use of oikoumenē and
projects the meaning of Jesus' words to "the end times."
 Marcellus Kik's Matthew 24
Sometime later, the RTS librarian put out some books from his personal
library to sell. My eyes focused on a faded red hardback with "Matthew
XXIV" stamped on the spine. It was J. Marcellus Kik's commentary on the
Olivet Discourse. In the Preface to the second edition, Kik wrote:

The first edition of this work was published in 1948 and it is indeed
gratifying that the demand for it has necessitated a second edition. The
particular interpretation represented in this book found slow
acceptance but in recent years approval has multiplied, especially with
the decline of the dispensational position.15

In time, I learned that Kik's interpretive model was not new or unique to
him. In addition, I found that the interpretation that the Olivet Discourse
had been fulfilled before that first-century generation passed away has a
long and distinguished history among Bible commentators from diverse
orthodox theological traditions. Kik's exposition of Matthew 24 forever
changed the way I studied the Bible because it used the Bible to interpret
the Bible. In the first edition of his commentary, Kik expressed how I felt
after reading his exposition:

It is with a thrill that one suddenly discovers the key which unlocks the
meaning of a difficult portion of Scripture. Matthew Twenty-four is
difficult to understand. It is made more difficult by commentaries
which speak of "double meanings," "prophetic perspectives," and
"partial and complete fulfillments."16

Through a process of discovery and study, I found that a first-century

interpretation of the Olivet Discourse was a common feature in
commentaries and in various narrative-style books that described the fall of
Jerusalem in AD 70 as it is outlined in the synoptic gospels.
For example, Alfred J. Church's The Story of the Last Days of Jerusalem
(1902), William Patton's The Judgment of Jerusalem Predicted in Scripture,
Fulfilled in History (1876), and George Halford's The Destruction of
Jerusalem: An Absolute and Irresistible Proof of the Divine Origin of
Christianity (1805), to name just three in my possession.
There are also numerous editions of Alexander Keith's Evidence of the
Truth of the Christian Religion Derived from the Literal Fulfilment of
Prophecy, etc. in which he includes a chapter on "The Destruction of
Jerusalem."17 Keith's apologetic work on prophecy was designed to counter
liberal claims that the Bible is merely the work of men. Bible prophecy,
Keith maintained, demonstrated that this was an impossible claim that
could not be defended in terms of many examples of fulfilled prophecy.
Edward Giddings, in his book American Christian Rulers, "relates how
Keith's book was instrumental in persuading Supreme Court chief justice
John Marshall of the messianic claims of Jesus Christ in the days before his
death on July 6, 1835."18 The following is from Giddings:

[Marshall] believed in the truth of the Christian revelation, but not in

the divinity of Christ; therefore, he could not commune in the
Episcopal Church. But, during the last months of his life, he read Keith
on Prophecy, where our Saviour's divinity is incidentally treated, and
was convinced by his work, and the fuller investigation to which it led,
of the supreme divinity of the Saviour.19

Jesus and His "Mistaken Prophecy"

There is a history of skeptics that turn to Bible prophecy and claim Jesus
was wrong about the timing of His coming at "the end of the age" (Matt.
24:3) and the signs associated with it. Noted atheist Bertrand Russell (1872-
1970) wrote the following in his book Why I Am Not a Christian, a lecture
he delivered on March 6, 1927 to the National Secular Society:

I am concerned with Christ as he appears in the Gospel narrative as it

stands, and there one does find some things that do not seem to be very
wise. For one thing, He certainly thought that His second coming
would occur in clouds of glory before the death of all the people who
were living at that time. There are a great many texts that prove that
and there are a lot of places where it is quite clear that He believed that
His coming would happen during the lifetime of many then living.
That was the belief of His earlier followers, and it was the basis of a
good deal of His moral teaching.20

It's obvious that Russell was not aware of, or ignored, the mountain of
scholarship available to him that showed that the prophecy given by Jesus
was fulfilled in exacting detail, when He said it would, before the
generation of those to whom He was speaking passed away.
 There have been others. C. S. Lewis understood the dilemma present in
Jesus' statement in Matthew 24:34 that He would return before that first-
century generation passed away. After dealing with critics who maintained
that Jesus was just another Palestinian seer, Lewis confronts what he
considers to be the more serious objection:

But there is worse to come. "Say what you like," we shall be told, "the
apocalyptic beliefs of the first Christians have been proved to be false.
It is clear from the New Testament that they all expected the Second
Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and
one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told
them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so
many words, 'this generation shall not pass till all these things be
done.' And He was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of
the world than anyone else."
It is certainly the most embarrassing verse in the Bible.21

In his debate with Douglas Wilson in 2008, and captured in the video
Collision, the late self-described "non-theist" Christopher Hitchens charged
that Jesus was mistaken when He predicted His coming within a generation
because it did not come to pass.22 This, of course, would make Jesus a false
prophet and the New Testament an unreliable authority. In just a few
sentences Wilson showed that Jesus was referring to a judgment coming
that took place before that first-century generation passed away.
The Old Testament is filled with similar judgment-coming language, and
Jesus was appropriating that language for His purpose. It's the only way to
read the Olivet Discourse. Hitchens did not know how to answer Wilson
since he was unaware of the preterist (past) interpretation that is standard in
many commentaries. He threw out a few red herrings about talking donkeys
and a personal devil but could not answer Wilson's interpretation.
The skeptics are reading the Olivet Discourse in the right way, that Jesus
said He would return before that contemporary generation passed away, but
come to the wrong conclusion that Jesus was mistaken. Christian futurists
reading it the wrong way, arguing that Jesus was describing any generation
but His own generation. Jesus predicted that He would return within the
time period of that generation, and that generation alone. Unfortunately, too
many Christians are giving the wrong answer when skeptics claim Jesus
was mistaken.23 Everything Jesus said would happen before that generation
passed away did happen.
 1. "But to what shall I compare this generation?" (Matt. 11:16).
2. "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign
will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet" (Matt. 12:39).
3. "The men of Nineveh shall stand up with this generation at the
judgment, and shall condemn it because they repented at the preaching of
Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here" (Matt. 12:41; cf.
Luke 11:29). Jesus could only have meant that generation since it was the
only generation that could be condemned, because Jesus is the someone
who is "greater than Jonah" who was in their presence similar to the way
Jonah was in the presence of the Ninevites.
4. "The Queen of the South shall rise up with this generation at the
judgment and shall condemn it" (Matt. 12:42).
5. "An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign; and a sign will
not be given it, except the sign of Jonah." (Matt. 16:4).
6. "And Jesus answered and said, 'You unbelieving and perverted
generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I put up with
you? Bring him here to Me'" (Matt. 17:17).
7. "Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation"
(Matt. 23:36).
8. The Bible describes a specific generation. In the case of
Deuteronomy 32:5, 20, the generation that was in the wilderness was not
the Jewish race throughout history or during a distant period of "great
tribulation." The same is true of Psalm 78:8: "And not be like their fathers,
a stubborn and rebellious generation, a generation that did not prepare its
heart and whose spirit was not faithful to God."
9. Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1973), 868.
10. Anthony Hoekema, The Bible and The Future (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1979), 117.
11. "This [Jesus], delivered over by the predetermined plan and
foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men
and put Him to death."
12. "For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are
far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself. And with many
other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, 'Be
saved from this perverse generation!'"
13. Hendriksen, Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew, 868.
14. See James H. Hamilton, God's Glory in Salvation through
Judgment: A Biblical Theology (Wheaton: IL: Crossway, 2010), 377: "Jesus
explains that there will be birth pains until the gospel has gone through the
whole world (24:4-14)." Also, Michael Horton: "Since the gospel was
obviously not preached to all the nations by AD 70, it is impossible to
conclude with preterists that the 'end' to which Jesus refers is a past event."
The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), 937. Other commentators disagree:
"How often this passage has been applied to the final end of the world!
Some, seeing much of the world unevangelized, take comfort that the end is
not near. However, most of the empire was evangelized before A.D. 70 (1
Thess. 1:8; Rom. 1:5, 8; Col. 1:6, 23)." Jack P. Lewis, The Gospel
According to Matthew: The Living Word Commentary (Austin, TX: Sweet
Publishing Company, 1976), 2:124. The "end" to which Jesus refers is not
the end of the world (kosmos), as some translations have it, but the "end of
the age" (aion) (Matt. 24:3).
15. J. Marcellus Kik, Matthew Twenty-Four: An Exposition, rev. ed.
(Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948), vii.
16. J. Marcellus Kik, Matthew Twenty-Four: An Exposition (Swengel,
PA: Bible Truth Depot, 1948), 9.
17. For a comprehensive list of commentators who take a similar
interpretive position going back centuries, see chapter 10 of Wars and
Rumors of Wars: "This Generation" Not "That Generation."
18. Eric Rauch, Publisher's Foreword, Alexander Keith, Evidence of
the Truth of the Christian Religion: Derived from the Literal Fulfillment of
Prophecy (White Hall, WV: Tolle Lege Press, [1834] 2011), v.
19. Edward Giddings, American Christian Rulers, or Religion and
Men of Government (New York: Bromfield and Company, 1889), 332.
American Christian Rulers was reprinted by American Vision Press,
Powder Springs, Georgia, in 2011. The corresponding page number in the
new edition is 348.
20. Bertrand Russell, Why I Am Not a Christian (New York: Simon
and Schuster, 1957), 16.
 21. C. S. Lewis, The World's Last Night and Other Essays (New York:
Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1960), 97-98. Also see Gerald A. Larue,
"The Bible and the Prophets of Doom," Skeptical Inquirer
(January/February 1999), 29; Michael Shermer, How We Believe: The
Search for God in an Age of Science (New York: W. H. Freeman and
Company, 2000), 1-7; Tim Callahan, Bible Prophecy: Failure or
Fulfillment? (Altadena, CA: Millennium Press, 1997), 204-229.
22. See the film Collision and Joel McDurmon's Collision: The
Official Study Guide (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2010), chap.
8.
23. Gary DeMar, "This is Not the Way to Answer This Bible
Question" (June 25, 2017): https://goo.gl/m7iwE5
 ONE

Text, Context, Audience

Without a proper context, a verse from the Bible could be used to support
atheism, because as one out-of-context passage reads, "There is no God"
(Psalm 14:1). The full reading of a passage in its proper context reveals its
true meaning: "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are
corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds; There is no one who does
good."
We're often told, "The Bible commands us not to judge." While in the
above "atheist" text, the context is contained in a single verse (it's the fool
who says there is no God), this is not the case with Matthew 7:1: "Do not
judge so that you will not be judged." It's only in the second verse where a
more accurate contextual study supplies a better understanding of the first
verse: "For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard
of measure, it will be measured to you."
Jesus is commanding that a person who judges a situation must be
consistent in his judgment. The Bible forbids using two different standards
of judgments (Deut. 25:13-16). There are numerous calls in the Bible to
practice righteous judgment (John 7:24; Lev. 19:15, 35-36; Isa. 11:3; Zech.
7:9).
The rules regarding (1) citing a text correctly, (2) in its full context, (3)
including the intended audience, does not change when a longer passage is
being studied. In fact, greater attention to these three elements is necessary
to come away with the proper interpretation.

Text
It's impossible to interpret a passage correctly when it isn't cited correctly.
Sometimes it's a translation issue. The Greek words aion and oikoumenē are
often translated as "world" instead of "age" and "inhabited earth." Words
are often added to a passage to force a particular translation. For example,
as we will see with Matthew 24:34, some prophecy commentators will
remove and/or add words to make a passage fit a prophetic preconception.
Instead of Matthew 24:34 reading, "This generation will not pass away until
all these things take place," the passage is made to read, "The generation
that sees these signs will not pass away until all these things take place."

Context
In terms of audience relevance related to a study of the Olivet Discourse,
students of Scripture need to begin with Matthew 21:1 where we read that
Jesus and some of His disciples had come "to the Mount of Olives." By the
time we get to chapter 23, Jesus is still in the vicinity of the Mount of
Olives. In this way, the chapter "serves as a sort of introduction to the
eschatological discourse of Matt 24-25…. Thus the judgment of Jerusalem,
primarily its leaders and its Temple, is justified in Matt 23 before it is
predicted in Matt 24-25."1 It's in Matthew 23 that Jesus tells His audience
that their "house" is going to be left to them "desolate" (23:38). Jesus' use of
"house" is a reference to the temple that had been built after Israel returned
from captivity and later had undergone reconstruction beginning in 19 BC
by Herod the Great (John 2:19-20). Jesus was in the temple when He
pronounced that the temple would be left to them desolate. We know this
from what Matthew states in the following chapter. Keep in mind that there
were no chapter or verse divisions in the original manuscripts or their later
copies:

Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His
disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him. And He
said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not
one stone here will be left upon another, which will not be torn down"
(Matt. 24:1-2).

It's in Matthew 23:36 where the definition of "this generation" is confirmed

to mean the generation — the people then living — to whom Jesus was
speaking: "Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this
generation." Notice the use of "these things" and "this generation." We will
see similar words in Matthew 24:33-34. "This generation" is a reference to
that first-century generation, not ours. Even the original popular Scofield
Reference Bible confirms that "The prediction of v. 36 [in Matt. 23] was
fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70."2 The KJV Bible
Commentary interprets "this generation" in the same way and adds an
important qualification: "While some have attempted to relate 'generation'
(Gr genea) to the race of the Jews, indicating the survival of their race until
Christ's return, this seems somewhat stretched." The Scofield Reference
Bible tries to stretch the meaning of genea to mean "race" with the
following note:

Gr. genea, the primary definition of which is, "race, kind, family,
stock, breed." (So all lexicons.) That the word is used in this sense
because none of "these things," i.e. the world-wide preaching of the
kingdom, the great tribulation, the return of the Lord in visible glory,
and the regathering of the elect, occurred at the destruction of
Jerusalem by Titus, A.D. 70. The promise is, therefore, that the
generation — nation, or family of Israel — will be preserved unto
"these things"; a promise wonderfully fulfilled to this day.

As we'll see when we get to Matthew 24:34 in chapter 10 where "this

generation" is used again by Jesus, genea never means "race." In the New
Testament, it always refers to the generation to whom Jesus was addressing.
"All lexicons" do not agree with Scofield's genea = "race" claim.

The Audience
There are two additional items in Matthew 23 that need to be discussed
before the Olivet Discourse itself can be interpreted properly. As we will
see in Matthew 24, Jesus continually uses the second-person plural ("you")
to identify His present audience: "when you see these things" (24:33).
Follow the use of "you" throughout the chapter and notice that it refers to
Jesus' present audience (24:2, 4, 6, 9, 15, 33, etc.). If this audience reference
is reliable, then Jesus could not have had a future generation in mind or He
would have used the third-person plural ("they"): "when they see these
things."
Some prophecy writers object to this argument by claiming that "the
pronoun does not always require that the listening audience is in view."3For
example, Randall Price uses Deuteronomy 30 in an attempt to make the
case that Jesus' use of "you" "may refer to the future 'this genera-tion.'"4 It's
obvious that the use of "you" by Moses refers to the nation since the entire
nation was being addressed.5 While it's appropriate to refer to the Old
Testament when a passage is quoted in the New Testament, why go back to
Deuteronomy 30 for how "you" is used when there are hundreds of
examples of the use of "you" in Matthew's gospel? An interpreter would be
hard pressed to find "you" being used by Jesus in Matthew in any way other
than as a reference to the audience that He was addressing:

"Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from
you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it. And he who falls
on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will
scatter him like dust. When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard
His parables, they understood that He was speaking about them"
(Matt. 21:43-45).

The Pharisees understood "you" to refer to them, and Jesus did not
correct them, because He meant them.

Who Murdered Zechariah, the Son of Berechiah?

Another argument raised by futurists to discount the use of the second-
person plural in the Olivet Discourse is an appeal to Matthew 23:34-35
where Jesus levels a series of indictments against the scribes and Pharisees
(23:2) with these words:

"Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and

scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you
will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, so
that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on
earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the
son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the
altar" (Matt. 23:34-35).

Susan M. Rieske is correct when she writes that "Jesus attributed the killing
of Zechariah to the scribes and Pharisees, for He said he was one 'whom
you murdered' (ἐφονεύσατε). Jesus accused them of directly committing the
murder of Zechariah."6 It's obvious that the use of "you" refers to Jesus'
present audience made up of scribes and Pharisees (Matt. 23:2, 13, 14, 15,
25, 26, 27, 29) including its multiple uses in verses 34 and 35. The claim is
made by futurists that this single use of "you" in verse 23:35 refers to a past
audience. If this is the case, then it's the only exception in Jesus' Mount of
Olives Discourse (Matt. 21-25) where "you" refers to some other audience
other than Jesus' present audience. But even here I believe Jesus is referring
to His present audience. The use of "whom you murdered" is chosen by
Jesus to reinforce "the solidarity in guilt with the fathers."7 This makes
perfect sense by reading what Jesus said earlier in the same chapter and is
referenced elsewhere in the New Testament: "So you testify against
yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up,
then, the measure of the guilt of your fathers" (Matt. 23:31-32; see Acts
7:51; 1 Thess. 2:14-16). These Jews were just like their fathers in that they
murdered prophets who brought a message of repentance and redemption to
the nation.
Futurists minimize the importance of the use of "you" as an audience
indicator by pointing out that those in Jesus' immediate audience could not
have murdered Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, since he had been killed
centuries before (2 Chron. 24:20-21 or Zech. 1:1). Norman L. Geisler
explains:

Another argument for the preterist8 view is that "you" in many texts
must refer to the immediate first-century audience... They cite
Matthew 23:35 as proof: "On you may come all the blood shed on the
earth." Ironically, that very verse proves the contrary since "you" is
used in it of the people who slew Zechariah in the Old Testament who
was long dead. So, "you" can be used historically to refer to "your
ancestors" just as it can be used proleptically [by way of anticipation]
of "your descendants."9

Let's suppose for the sake of argument that Geisler is correct and "you" in
Matthew 23:35 is being used "historically" to refer to their long-dead
ancestors. It does not follow, because there is one case in which "you"
refers to a distant past audience, that the other uses of "you" refer to a future
audience (e.g., Matt. 24:33). The second person plural is used six times in
23:34-36. To what audiences do these uses of "you" refer? They refer to the
same audience, the audience to whom Jesus was speaking.
The question is not how a word can be used but how it is being used. The
argument for the use of "you" as an audience determiner is based on the
way it is used consistency throughout Matthew's gospel, including the
Olivet Discourse. Who is the audience in Matthew 24? It's the disciples.
"His disciples came up to point out the temple buildings to Him" (24:1).
Who are the "you" of 24:2? The disciples. "And He said to them, 'Do you
not see all these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here will be left
upon another, which will not be torn down." The descendants of the
disciples were not the ones seeing "all these things." In 24:4, Jesus says to
"them," "[You] see10 to it that no one misleads you." When the use of
"you" is examined from 24:2 to 24:34, it consistently refers to the audience
to whom Jesus is speaking. Who does the "you" refer to in Matthew 23?
Jesus' present audience. The same is true for chapter 24. The "you" is them.
A comment in Tim LaHaye's Prophecy Study Bible claims that the use of
"you" in Matthew 24:15 "must be taken generically as 'you of the Jewish
nation.'"11 Where in the text does it say this? There is no evidence offered
by the editors to substantiate a shift in audience reference from the disciples
to Jews living at a time far removed from their day. If Jesus had wanted to
refer to a different audience, He could have said, "When they see the
abomination of desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet,
standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)." But even if the "you"
in 24:15 does refer to the "you of the Jewish nation," the reference is to the
Jews of the Jewish nation of that first-century generation (see Matt. 12:39-
42).
The problem with Geisler's view, and with those who agree with it, is
that there is no record in the Old Testament of a Zechariah, son of
Berechiah, being murdered. Many scholars believe Jesus was referring to
"Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest" mentioned in 2 Chronicles 24:20-
21. "It might seem natural to see in Abel and Zechariah the first and the last
martyrs of the OT Scripture (Gen. iv and II Chron xxiv 20ff.)."12
Yes, it might seem natural, but the burden of proof is on those who claim
that Jesus was making a circuitous connection where one was not needed or
implied. For example, Thomas A. Howe contends that the use of "son" can
mean "son," "descendant," or "grandson." This is true. From this Howe
argues, "The reason Jesus said 'Berechiah' is because this was Zechariah's
actual father."13 Howe does not tell us how he knows that someone named
Berechiah was his "actual father." What passage proves his claim? The Old
Testament says that the Zechariah who was murdered was "the son of
Jehoiada the priest" (2 Chron. 24:21). Howe claims that Jehoiada was his
grandfather. So, what if he was? This still does not mean that someone
named Berechiah was his father. E. H. Plumptre makes the following
summary point:

The assumptions (1) that Jehoiada may have borne Barachiah as a

 second name, (2) or that he may have had a son of that name, and been
really the grandfather of the martyr, are obviously hypotheses invented
for the occasion, without a shadow of evidence.14

If Jesus meant the Zechariah who was killed "in the court of the house of
the LORD" (2 Chron. 24:21), then why didn't He say "son of Jehoiada"
instead of "son of Berechiah''? He didn't say it because He was referring to
a different Zechariah. This shouldn't surprise us since there are many people
in the Bible named Zechariah, and "prophets and priests were not
infrequently murdered by their rivals."15 Gleason L. Archer identifies
"about twenty-seven different individuals mentioned in the Old Testament
bearing the name Zechariah,"16 while R. T. France says "there are thirty."17
"The most frequently occurring personal name in the Bible is Zechariah
(also spelled Zachariah or in the New Testament as Zacharias). At least
thirty kings, princes, priests, prophets, servants, sons, trumpet players, and
gatekeepers claim this name, which means 'Jehovah remembers.'"18
Archer represents the view that Zechariah is "the prophet Zechariah, son
of Berechiah, the son of Iddo" (Zech. 1:1, 7). This interpretation has the
advantage of not having to explain why Jesus used Berechiah rather than
Jehoiada. But there is no record of this Zechariah being killed in the manner
described by Jesus.19 According to Jewish tradition, this Zechariah "died
peacefully at a great age (Liv. Pro. 15:6)."20 Even so, Archer writes, "we
can only conclude that the later Zechariah died in much the same way the
earlier one did, as a victim of popular resentment against his rebuke of their
sins."21
If it's possible that the Zechariah, son of Berechiah, from the book of
Zechariah was murdered but never recorded, as Archer and others argue,
then it's possible that Jesus uses the second person plural when speaking to
those who "are sons of those who murdered the prophets" who were filling
up "the measure of their fathers" (23:31-22) by murdering a Zechariah
whose father was named Bachariah. Not only were they guilty of past
murders like their fathers, but they would be guilty of future murders of
"prophets and wise men" who they will "kill and crucify" and scourge in
their synagogues and "persecute from city to city" (23:34). If they are like
their fathers and their murderous ways, should it surprise us that they would
murder a Zechariah who was the son of a man named Berechiah? "After all,
Matthew had already described them as full of ... lawlessness [23:28]."22
Jerome (c. 347-420), best recognized for his translation of most of the
Bible into Latin, known as the Vulgate, made the following comment on the
identity of Zechariah the son of Berechiah:

Because we read about so many Zechariahs in Scripture, we need to

inquire into the identity of this particular Zechariah, the son of
Berekiah. Lest we mistake him for another, the Gospel specifies
"whom you killed between the sanctuary and the altar." Yet there
remains a variety of diverse opinions on this question, each of which
ought to be considered.23 Some say that this Zechariah the son of
Berekiah is the eleventh of the twelve minor prophets. Although their
fathers share the same name, however, they cannot be the same
persons because the prophet Zechariah was never said to have been
killed between the sanctuary and the altar and especially because the
temple had just recently been destroyed in the prophet's time.24

As mentioned earlier, there is no record of the prophet Zechariah (Zech.

1:1) being murdered. Berechiah, like Zechariah,25 is a common name in the
Bible (1 Chron. 3:20; 6:39; 9:16; 15:17; 15:23; 2 Chron. 28:12; Neh. 3:4,
30). Jesus says that it was this Zechariah who was murdered by some of
those who were standing before Him. Why shouldn't we believe Him?
James Burton Coffman takes this most logical and straightforward view that
some see as "a well-known difficulty." The difficulty disappears if we trust
the text:

Why should there be a difficulty? It is obvious that Christ here referred

to some secret murder perpetrated, not by the ancestors of those men,
but "by them. Whom ye slew!" This could not be an indictment of
their ancestors but plainly refers to a murder those wicked men had
committed themselves. Christ tried with that one last lightning stroke
of truth to get through to them, but even that failed. That no such
murder was recorded in either the Old Testament or the New
Testament, and that there was no general knowledge of it in the days
of Christ, and that no traditions were developed with reference to it —
these things present no difficulty at all, but point squarely at the
Pharisees and show their effectiveness in covering up their evil deeds
and hiding them from popular view. (It was precisely this ability they
relied upon when they decided to make away with Jesus. See Matthew
26:1-4). It is further evidence of their depravity that none of them ever
confessed it, even after he who knew their thoughts revealed it
 publicly! Their guilty secret went to the grave with them, except for
this ray of light from the lips of Christ who made it known on the
occasion of them being sentenced to hell for their wickedness.26

Jesus states that His present audience had a hand in killing someone named
Zechariah, son of Berechiah. I trust Jesus more than I trust commentators
who go to great lengths in an attempt to prove what they cannot prove and
deny what is plainly stated.
An early church tradition holds that Zechariah, son of Berechiah, was the
father of John the Baptist. "[Protoevangelium of James] 23:3 (second
century A.D.) has this Zechariah killed by Herod's men 'at the threshold of
the Lord's temple.'" Herod Antipas, "the tetrarch," had John the Baptist
murdered (Matt. 14:1-13; Mark 6:14-29). Like father, like son? It's unlikely
that Zechariah son of Berechiah was the father of John the Baptist since the
fanciful Protoevangelium of James states that he was killed during the time
of Herod's murder of the innocents that took place 30 years before Jesus'
public ministry.27
There are some historical events mentioned in the gospels that are not
recorded elsewhere (e.g., Luke 13:1-5), so it wouldn't be out of place for
Jesus to mention an unrecorded event that was known to His present
audience but not recorded in the gospels. In addition, killing a priest isn't
beyond the actions of the scribes and Pharisees considering that they
wanted to kill a woman caught in adultery to bring a charge against Jesus
that could result in His death (John 7:53-8:11). They even tried to kill Jesus
on several occasions (Matt. 12:14; 26:4; Mark 9:31; 14:1; Luke 22:2; John
5:18; 7:1, 30; 11:53; Acts 2:23).28 A reading of the book of Acts will show
a similar effort to kill their religious opposition. Stephen is a perfect
example (Acts 7:5460), and so is Paul (14:19; 23:20-23; 2 Cor. 11:23-27; 2
Tim. 3:11). Notice how the death of James, the brother of John, "pleased
the Jews" (12:3).
If "son of Berechiah" is an interpolation or a scribal addition since Codex
Sinaiticus29 does not include the phrase "son of Berechiah,"30 then Matthew
23:35 would read like Luke 11:51: "from the blood of Abel to the blood of
Zechariah." Any contemporary person named Zechariah would fit the
description up until the time of Jesus' public ministry. Consider what Jesus
said in Luke 11:49:

For this reason also the wisdom of God said, "I will send to them
 prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and some they
will persecute, so that the blood of all the prophets, shed since the
foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation."

Jesus is referring to what "the wisdom of God" said about what would
happen to those of that generation: "Woe to you..." (11:46, 47, 52). You
see, prophets had been sent to their generation ("this generation": Matt.
23:36; 24:34). The wisdom of God said so, and some of those prophets had
been killed by them, one of whom was named Zechariah (Luke 11:51). It
makes no sense to argue that "Jesus was referring to the wicked people of
all time, those before the Messiah and those after."31 The "apostles" and
"prophets" were killed in Jesus' day and in the period leading to the
judgment on Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple that took place in
AD 70, before their generation passed away. Why indict future generations
when it was the generation of Jesus' day that would "fill up the measure of
their fathers" (Matt. 23:32). The "filling up" is a past event (1 Thess. 2:14-
16) that was "charged" to their generation and only their generation (Luke
11:51). Craig L. Blomberg writes:

The qualification "this generation" [Matt. 23:33, 36] should also warn
us against the tragic abuse of this verse by many throughout church
history who have not limited Jesus' words to the generation of A.D. 70
and have thus condemned Jews of all subsequent eras as well. "On
earth" [v. 35] translates "upon the land" and is probably limited to
Israel as the places in which its ancestors dwelt.32

The same argument applies to Matthew 24:34. Any generation other than
the generation to whom Jesus was speaking could be, and unfortunately
often has been, declared guilty for being "Christ killers." But only one
generation was guilty: "The men of Nineveh will stand up with this
generation at the judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at
the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here"
(Matt. 12:41). God in His mercy delayed His judgment for a generation to
afford His chosen people an opportunity to repent (Acts 2:40-47) and/or
escape (Matt. 24:15-22) the threatened catastrophe that took place in AD
70.

Blessed Is He Who Comes in the Name of the Lord

Another point of contention concerns Jesus' statement in Matthew 23:39:
"For I say to you, from now on you will not see Me until you say, 'Blessed
is He who comes in the name of the Lord!'" Stanley Toussaint believes this
verse speaks against a first-century fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse
because it holds out hope for a future conversion of the Jews as a nation.
Since this hasn't happened, Toussaint argues, the prophetic events of
Matthew 24 remain unfulfilled. He agrees that the use of "your house"
(23:38) refers to the destruction of the temple in AD 70, but "verse 39
describes Israel's future repentance when they will mourn because of their
great sin (Zech. 12:10)."33
This distant futuristic interpretation is impossible and makes no sense
since some Jews of that generation rejected Jesus and witnessed against
Him at His trials, and when given the opportunity to have Jesus released as
their king, cried out, "We have no king but Caesar" (John 19:15, also Acts
2:22-23). As R. T. France argues, the word "For, with which the verse
begins, unambiguously links it with God's abandonment of his house in v.
38."34 The two events are linked in time and place and cannot be separated
by two millennia. If Matthew 23:38 refers to the generation of Jews that
will see the destruction of Jerusalem, then so does what Jesus describes in
verse 39.
Part of the problem in understanding the relationship between verses 38
and 39 in Matthew 23 is in the way "until" is interpreted. France contends
that "the words until you say are expressed in Greek as an indefinite
possibility rather than as a firm prediction; this is the condition on which
they will see him again; but there is no promise that the condition will be
fulfilled."35
In his final and most comprehensive commentary on Matthew, France
reinforces his earlier comments: "There is no prediction here, only a
condition. Or, rather, the only prediction is an emphatic negative, 'from now
on you will certainly not see me,' to which the following 'until' clause
provides the only possible exception. They will not see him again until they
welcome him, but the indefinite phrasing of the second clause gives no
assurance that such a welcome will ever be forthcoming."36 The following
verses demonstrate the conditional use of "until":

• "Truly I say to you, you shall not come out of there, until you have
paid up the last cent" (Matt. 5:26).

• "He was unwilling however, but went and threw him in prison until
 he should pay back what was owed" (Matt. 18:30).

• "And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers
until he should repay all that was owed him" (Matt. 18:34).

• "And when it was day, the Jews formed a conspiracy and bound
themselves under an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink
until they had killed Paul" (Acts 23:12).

These verses show that the results are neither prophetic nor assured.
Actions do not take place unless or until certain conditions are met. For
example, until the person pays full restitution — "the last cent" — he will
remain in prison.
Donald Green argues that Jesus is referring "to a future event that will
occur even if the time of fulfillment is uncertain."37 France disagrees: "It is
remarkable that so many interpreters can find a positive prediction in what
is in fact an emphatically negative prediction."38 But let's suppose Green is
right that Jesus is describing how in the future Jews will embrace Jesus as
the Messiah. Throughout the period between the crucifixion and the
destruction of Jerusalem, many Jews (a remnant: Rom. 9:27; 11:5) came to
believe that Jesus was the promised Redeemer. In Acts 2:37, after hearing
Peter's Pentecost message, the Jews "were pierced to the heart, and said to
Peter and the rest of the apostles, 'Brethren, what shall we do?'" Peter told
them that they must "repent" in order to "be saved from this perverse
generation" (2:38, 40), the same generation that Jesus said would witness
the events described by Him in the Olivet Discourse.
Three thousand Jewish converts were added to the believing community
"that day" (2:41), "the Lord was adding to their number day by day those
who were being saved" (2:47), and the disciples were "increasing in
numbers" (6:1), so much so that "a great many of the priests were becoming
obedient to the faith" (6:7). Luke records, "many of those who had heard
the message believed; and the number of the men came to be about five
thousand" (4:4). The very thing Jesus said must happen (Matt. 23:39) did
happen. Paul confirms this when he wrote, "I say then, God has not rejected
His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant
of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin" (Rom 11:1).
Bear in mind that what Jesus declared on the Mount of Olives and what
Matthew records for us was a prophecy about the future of Israel's then-
living generation. Jesus spoke to His present audience around AD 33, and
the temple was destroyed in AD 70. The destruction of the temple was
future, but only a future that was a generation in length! It's surprising that
Donald Green, a critic of a first-century fulfillment of Matthew 24, could
write the following: "A reader previously unacquainted with preterist
writings will no doubt wonder how they could claim past fulfillment of the
Olivet Discourse, when so much of its language seems to refer to the
future."39
The entire prophecy was about the future, a future that was in the
generational sights of that first-century generation and is now fulfilled!
Green makes several unsubstantiated charges. I found this one to be the
most outrageous: "when the ordinary sense of a passage in that section of
the Olivet Discourse seems future, the preterist understands it to be using
figurative language to refer to a now-past event."40 This is absurd. As has
been mentioned, the entire discourse was about future when Jesus answered
His disciples regarding their questions about the destruction of the temple
and the end of the age (Matt. 24:2-3). There is nothing figurative about
earthquakes, wars and rumors of wars, famines, false prophets, false christs,
a great tribulation, and fleeing to literal mountains in literal Judea. Green
has almost nothing to say about how preterists take a non-figurative
interpretive approach to all these prophetic elements in the many books and
articles that have been written on the subject over the centuries. The reason
preterists take a non-figurative approach is because the Bible does, as will
be pointed out in the following chapters. When a symbolic or "figurative"
approach is followed in particular passages, it's because the Bible follows
such an approach. The Bible is the best interpreter of itself.
With this introductory background in mind, let's proceed to a verse-by-
verse study of the Olivet Discourse as it appears in Matthew's gospel with
periodic comparisons to parallel passages found in Mark 13 and Luke
17:2237, 19:41-44, and 21:5-38.

1. David L. Turner, "Matthew 23 as Prophetic Critique," Journal of

Biblical Studies, 4:1 (January 2004), 25: https://goo.gl/Y3n0l8
2. C. I. Scofield, The New Scofield Study Bible (Nashville: Thomas
Nelson Publishers, 1989), 1167, footnote 3.
3. Paul N. Benware, Understanding End Times Prophecy: A
Comprehensive Approach, rev. ed. (Chicago: Moody Publishes, 2007), 163.
4. Randall Price, "Historical Problems with a First Century
Fulfillment," The End Times Controversy: The Second Coming Under
Attack, eds. Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice (Eugene, OR: Harvest House,
2003), 380.
5. Price claims that Moses' "words speak about a future generation that
will live thousands of years later and into the eschatological period." There
is nothing in the context that leads necessarily to this unproven assumption.
6. Susan M. Rieske, "What is the Meaning of 'This Generation' in
Matthew 23:36?," Bibliotheca Sacra, 165 (April-June 2008), 214.
7. John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek
Text (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 947.
8. A preterist maintains that if a time text is attached to a prophecy,
then the fulfillment is governed by the time indicator. Words like "near,"
"shortly," and "quickly" (Rev. 1:2, 1:3; 22:7, 10; James 5:8), "right at the
door" (Matt. 24:33; Mark 13:29; James 5:9), "a little while" (Heb. 10:37),
"about to" (Rev. 3:10), "has come near" (1 Pet. 4:7) are interpretive guides
in determining the time frame of a prophecy. If these words and phrases
mean what they mean throughout the New Testament, then most New
Testament prophecies have been fulfilled in the past (preterism = past
fulfillment). Additionally, there are texts like Matthew 10:23; 16:27-28; 1
Corinthians 10:11; Hebrews 1:1-2; 9:26; 10:25; 1 Peter 1:20 that presume
an eschatological event on the near horizon for that first-century audience,
most likely the judgment coming of Jesus against
Jerusalem that took place in AD 70 when the Romans sacked the city
of Jerusalem and burned, looted, and dismantled the temple, stone-by-stone
as Jesus predicted (Matt. 24:2). The only other option is to argue if the texts
are taken literally "then they are all false claims, and all these writers were
just plain wrong: they said something was going to happen 'very soon,' but
it still hasn't happened almost 2,000 years later." Vernard Eller, "Stop the
Dating Game," Christianity Today (October 25, 1999), 79. Robert Thomas,
a dispensationalist, follows the same line of argument. A literal fulfillment
"would require the events to have taken place close to John's lifetime."
Revelation 1-7 (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1992), 55. There is a precedent
for this type of thinking, and it is condemned (2 Chron. 36:11-19).
9. Norman L. Geisler, "A Review of Hank Hanegraaff’s The
Apocalypse Code": https://goo.gl/6hscv1
10. Second person plural of βλέπω (blepō).
 11. Tim LaHaye, ed. Prophecy Study Bible (Chattanooga, TN: AMG
Publishers, 2000), 1038, note on Matthew 24:15.
12. W. F. Albright and C. S. Mann, Matthew (Garden City, NY:
Doubleday & Co., 1971), 282. Chronologically, the last Old Testament
prophet to be murdered was most likely Uriah (Jer. 26:20-23).
13. Howe, What the Bible Really Says, 106.
14. E. H. Plumptre, "The Gospel According to St. Matthew," A Bible
Commentary for English Readers, ed. Charles, J. Ellicott, 8 vols. (London:
Cassell, Petter, and Galpin, 1897), 6:144. John Lightfoot, usually a very
reliable scholar and exegete, takes an exhausting circuitous route in an
attempt to bring the reader back to Jehoiada when it is not necessary.
15. Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, 2nd
ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2008), 247.
16. Gleason L. Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1982), 338.
17. R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 2007), 881.
18. Lynne Hilton Wilson, "The Confusing Case of Zacharias," in
Religious Educator 14, no. 2 (2013), 107-123.
19. "Although there is an indication in Targum Lamentations that
'Zechariah son of Iddo' was killed in the Temple, scholars generally
understand this as a reference to the death of a much earlier figure,
Zechariah ben Jehoiada." This Targum was written after the publication of
Matthew's gospel. See S.H. Blank, "The Death of Zechariah in Rabbinic
Literature," HUCA 12-13 (1937-38), 327346 and Charlene McAfee Moss,
"Jesus and Zechariah — the Blood of Zechariah Son of Barachiah, in the
Temple" in The Zechariah Tradition and the Gospel of Matthew (Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter & Co., 2008), 103-126.
20. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 880.
21. Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, 338.
22. Robert H. Gundry, Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and
Theological Art (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 471.
23. The editor notes the following: "The difficulty here brought to
light by Jerome intrigues modern scholars as well, because from the Old
Testament it cannot be deduced with precision who 'Zechariah son of
Barachiah' actually was."
24. Quoted in Manlio Simonetti, ed., Ancient Christian Commentary
on Scripture: Matthew 14-28 (Downers, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 182.
25. Some commentators have suggested that the Zechariah son of
Berechiah in Matthew 23:35 "has been derived from the account of the
murder of Zacharias, the son of Baruch, in the Temple during the siege
(Jos. War, iv.5.4)." Alfred Edersheim lists four objections to this view: (1)
their names are different, (2) the place of their murder was different, (3) the
murder of Zechariah in 2 Chronicles 24:21 was considered "the crowning
national crime, and as such is repeatedly referred in Jewish legend" along
"with many miraculous embellishments," and (4) "because the clumsiest
forger would scarcely have put into the mouth of Jesus an event connected
with the last siege of Jerusalem and derived from Josephus." Take note that
Jesus uses a past tense not a future tense: "whom you murdered." The Life
and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 2 vols. in 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans
[1883], 1971), 2:413-414, note 2.
26. James Burton Coffman, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
(Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University Press, 1974), 375:
https://goo.gl/V7t7Mb
27. Edmon L. Gallagher, in "'The Blood from Abel to Zechariah in the
History of Interpretation' that appeared in New Testament Studies 60
(2014): 121-138, 'also mentions other patristic sources that interpret the
Zechariah of Matthew 23:35 as Zechariah the father of John the Baptist:
Basil of Caesarea (Hom. in Sanctem Christi generationem 5, PG 31.1468c-
1469a); Gregory of Nyssa (In diem natalem Salvadoris) ed. F. Mann,
Gregorii Nysseni opera 10.2; Leiden: Brill, 1996) 248-250; and Cyril of
Alexandria (Comm. in Lucam 11:47, PG 72.720b-721a). Gallagher argues
that Greek fathers preferred the Zechariah father of John the Baptist
interpretation, whereas Latin fathers preferred the Zechariah son of Jehoida
interpretation. A significant factor in the difference, according to Gallagher,
is that the Old Greek translation of II Chronicles 24 said that Azarias, not
Zechariah, was the person who was killed in II Chronicles 24.' From James
Bradford Pate, 'Two More Ideas on the Identity of Zechariah in Matthew
23:35.'" https://goo.gl/mM25ad
28. For a list of the literature on the possible identification of
Zechariah, son of Berechiah, see Robert H. Gundry, The Use of the Old
Testament in St. Matthew's Gospel with Special Reference to the Messianic
Hope (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1967), 86-88, note 1.
29. "Codex Sinaiticus, a manuscript of the Christian Bible written in
the middle of the fourth century, contains the earliest complete copy of the
Christian New Testament. The hand-written text is in Greek. The New
Testament appears in the original vernacular language (koine) and the Old
Testament in the version, known as the Septuagint, that was adopted by
early Greek-speaking Christians. In the Codex, the text of both the
Septuagint and the New Testament has been heavily annotated by a series
of early correctors. The significance of Codex Sinaiticus for the
reconstruction of the Christian Bible's original text, the history of the Bible
and the history of Western book-making is immense":
http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/codex/
30. https://greeknewtestament.net/mt23-35 Codex Vaticanus, also a
fourth century codex, does include "son of Berechiah" in Matthew 24:35.
31. Rieske, "What is the Meaning of 'This Generation' in Matthew
23:36?," 226.
32. Craig L. Blomberg, "Matthew," The New American Commentary
(Nashville: Broadman Press, 1992), 349.
33. Stanley D. Toussaint, "A Critique of the Preterist View of the
Olivet Discourse": https://goo.gl/0SJYJ9. John 19:37 is taken from
Zechariah 12:10 as something that "came to pass, that the Scripture might
be fulfilled" at the time of the crucifixion (19:36).
34. R. T. France, The Gospel According to Matthew: An Introduction
and Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990), 333.
35. France, The Gospel According to Matthew, 332.
36. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 884-885.
37. Donald E. Green, "A Critique of Preterism" (2001), 32:
https://goo.gl/ Zep6qz
38. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 885, note 11. Green maintains that
those who argue for the conditional approach of "until" have not based their
arguments "on independent exegesis, but rather in reliance on R. T. France,
Matthew, in Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1985), 332." (Green "A Critique of Preterism," 30, note 82). Are
we to suppose that France did not do his own "independent exegesis"?
Green needs to look at France's 2007 commentary and the extensive
exegetical work he has done on this topic (France, The Gospel of Matthew,
884-885, especially note 11 which is a direct answer to Green's claims).
39. Green, "A Critique of Preterism," 12.
40. Green, "A Critique of Preterism," 13.
 TWO

End of the Temple, End of the Age,

False Messiahs

MATTHEW 24:1-2
JESUS CAME OUT FROM THE TEMPLE AND WAS
GOING AWAY WHEN HIS DISCIPLES CAME UP
TO POINT OUT THE TEMPLE BUILDINGS TO
HIM. AND HE ANSWERED AND SAID TO THEM,
"DO YOU NOT SEE ALL THESE THINGS? TRULY
I SAY TO YOU, NOT ONE STONE HERE SHALL
BE LEFT UPON ANOTHER, WHICH WILL NOT BE
TORN DOWN."

When Jesus' disciples heard His prediction of "desolation" for the temple
and city (Matt. 23:29-39) when He "came out from the temple" (24:1), they
"came up to point out the temple buildings to Him," as if to say, "Lord, You
can't mean this temple that's adorned with beautiful stones and gifts given
in fulfillment of vows to God" (Luke 21:5). But Jesus confirmed His
pronouncement of judgment by declaring that "not one stone here shall be
left upon another, which will not be torn down." Notice Jesus said, "Not
one stone here shall be left upon another." Jesus was not describing what
would happen to some future rebuilt temple, of which the New Testament
says nothing.1 He was speaking about the destruction of the temple that
stood before the disciples at that time.
 Was the temple dismantled so that not one stone was left upon another?
Yes. The only written eye-witness account of the Roman destruction of the
Temple is from the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (AD 37-c. 100), a
former leader of the Jewish revolt who became a trusted ally of Vespasian,
from whom he took the family name of Flavius. A detailed account of the
destruction of Jerusalem is found in his The War of the Jews.2 Using
Josephus and other Jewish historical sources, Adam Clarke describes the
complete destruction of temple:

"Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the whole city and
temple,... except the three towers ... and a part of the western wall, and
these were spared; but, for all the rest of the wall, it was laid so
completely even with the ground, by those who dug it up to the
foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither
believe it had ever been inhabited." Maimonides, a Jewish Rabbin,...
says, "That the very foundations of the temple were dug up, according
to the Roman custom." His words are these: "On that ninth day of the
month Ab, fatal for vengeance, the wicked Turnus Rufus, of the
children of Edom, plowed up the temple, and the places round about it,
that the saying might be fulfilled, Zion shall be plowed as a field" [Jer.
26:18; Micah 3:12]. This Turnus, or rather Terentius Rufus, was left
general of the army by Titus, with commission, as the Jews suppose, to
destroy the city and the temple, as Josephus observes.3

Before the plowing up of the temple stones, the temple had been set ablaze.
Michael Wilkins, in his commentary on Mark, writes, "Jesus' prediction in
verse 2 says nothing of fire."4 This is true. There are many historical
elements related to the destruction of the temple that are not mentioned by
Jesus in the Olivet Discourse. Even so, in Matthew 22 Jesus said the
following in His parable of the marriage feast: "But the king was enraged,
and he sent his armies and destroyed those murderers and set their city on
fire" (v. 7; see Neh. 4:2; Psalm 79:1; Jer. 9:11). The following is an
excerpted account from Josephus:

Most of the slain were peaceful citizens, weak and unarmed, and they
were butchered where they were caught. The heap of corpses mounted
higher and higher about the altar; a stream of blood flowed down the
Temple's steps, and the bodies of those slain at the top slipped to the
bottom. While the Temple was ablaze, the attackers plundered it, and
 countless people who were caught by them were slaughtered. There
was no pity for age and no regard was accorded rank; children and old
men, laymen and priests, alike were butchered; every class was
pursued and crushed in the grip of war, whether they cried out for
mercy or offered resistance... The Temple Mount, everywhere
enveloped in flames, seemed to be boiling over from its base; yet the
blood seemed more abundant than the flames and the numbers of the
slain greater than those of the slayers. The soldiers climbed over heaps
of bodies as they chased the fugitives.5

Rebuilt-temple advocates Thomas Ice and Randall Price admit, "There are
no Bible verses that say, 'There is going to be a third temple.'"6 Having said
this, they still claim "that there will be a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem at
least by the midpoint of the seven-year tribulation period."7 Considering
that there are numerous places in the Old Testament that describe
rebuilding the temple that Solomon had built and was later destroyed (Ezra,
Nehemiah, Haggai) and ransacked by Nebuchadnezzar who removed "some
of the vessels of the house of God" and "brought them to the land of Shinar
to the house of his god ... and the treasury of his god" (Dan. 1:1-2), one
would think that there would be at least one verse in the New Testament
that says something about building the temple a third time. There isn't one.
These authors are not alone in claiming the Bible supports the belief that
the temple will be rebuilt, even though there is no direct biblical evidence to
support it. Merrill F. Unger stated, "The temple will be rebuilt, for the
'abomination of desolation' (Matt. 24:15) 'shall stand in the Holy Place,' in
the 'Temple of God' (Jewish Temple) rebuilt (II Thess. 2:4), with an 'altar'
and 'worshippers' (Rev. 11:1), and an 'outer court' in the 'Holy City'
(Jerusalem, cf. Rev. 11:2)."8
Unger misses the all-important audience relevance found in numerous
passages. For example:
When He approached Jerusalem, He saw the city and wept over it,
saying, "If you had known in this day, even you, the things which
make for peace! But now they have been hidden from your eyes. For
the days will come upon you when your enemies will throw up a
barricade against you, and surround you and hem you in on every side,
and they will level you to the ground and your children within you,
and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did
not recognize the time of your visitation" (Luke 19:41-44).
Jesus is dealing with Jerusalem, the temple, and the people of "this day." He
wept over the Jerusalem that was in view and made it clear that these
judgments would happen to them, as the use of "you" and "your" show.
They, like the temple stones (Matt. 24:2), would suffer a similar fate.
A similar audience reference is found in Matthew 24:14. "When you see
the abomination of desolation..." Those who first heard these words by
Jesus would have concluded that it would be those in their generation who
would see the temple reduced to rubble and the abomination of desolation,
and not a distant generation. If Jesus had a different generation in view, He
could have easily dispelled any confusion by saying, "when they see the
abomination of desolation." Note that 2 Thessalonians 2:4 does not say "so
that he [the man of lawlessness] takes his seat in a rebuilt temple of God."
The temple was still standing when Paul's second letter to the Thessalonians
was written.9 There is no mention of a rebuilt temple or any need for one. If
the Jews actually rebuild the temple, it won't have anything to do with Bible
prophecy and will be a denial of Jesus Christ.
Unger disputes Old Testament commentator Carl F. Keil's argument that
"the New Testament says nothing whatever concerning the rebuilding of the
Jerusalem temple and the restoration of the Levitical worship."10 Unger
accuses Keil of following a spiritualizing methodology. How can this be
when the burden of proof is on Unger to produce a verse that explicitly says
there will be a future rebuilt temple? Unger's rebuilt temple is a New
Testament phantom since there is not a single verse to support the claim.
The New Testament says much about the temple as a New Covenant
expression of the Christian's new life in Christ. Jesus' completed redemptive
work makes the need for a physical temple unnecessary and contrary to the
redemptive principles of the New Covenant, "for the Lord God the
Almighty and the Lamb are its temple" (Rev. 21:22). His ministry begins
with the declaration that He became flesh and "tabernacled" among His
people (John 1:14). Jesus is "the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the
world" (1:29), "the temple" (2:19-21), and the "chief cornerstone" (Matt.
21:42; Acts 4:11; Eph. 2:20) which means there is no longer a need for a
physical temple made of stones. By extension, believers are "as living
stones,… being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer
up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 2:5).
Those "in Christ" are the true temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16; 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph.
2:21).
Jesus and the people of God are the focus of the only temple that has any
redemptive significance under the New Covenant. To be "in Christ" is to be
in the temple and all it stood for, "the renewed centre and focus for the
people of God"11 (Rom. 12:5; 1 Cor. 1:2, 30; Gal. 3:14, 28; 5:6). The New
Testament references to the temple of stone refer only to its destruction
(Matt. 24:1-2), never its physical reconstruction. It is highly significant that
"Jesus never gives any hint that there will be a physical replacement for this
Temple. There is no suggestion, either in the Apocalyptic Discourse or
elsewhere, that this destruction will be but a preliminary stage in some
glorious 'restoration' of the Temple."12
The original physical temple was a shadow of better things to come. It
was designed to be a temporary edifice looking forward to the completed
work of Jesus Christ (Isa. 66:1-3; cf. 1:11-13; Mal. 1:10-11). For futurists
like dispensationalists to insist that another temple is needed to complete
some type of covenantal obligation with the Jews goes against the entire
New Testament and makes the "first covenant ... faultless" where we are
told that there is "no occasion sought for a second" (Heb. 8:7).
The problem with Unger's end-time scenario and those who follow his
lead is that the temple rebuilt by Herod was still standing when the
prophecies mentioning the physical temple and its demise were given.
Unger assumes the mention of a temple in a prophetic passage must be a
rebuilt temple that will be constructed during a tribulation period that
follows a pre-tribulational rapture of the church. If the physical temple in
Jerusalem is such a crucial piece of the end-time puzzle, why doesn't the
New Testament say anything about it? The silence is deafening and should
quiet calls for a new temple as part of an end-time prophetic program.
Remember how Jesus had described the temple to the Jews as "your
house" and how it would be left to them "desolate" (Matt. 23:38). Earlier
Jesus had inspected the temple (21:12-17). There He called it "My house"
(21:13) and cited two passages from the Old Testament that indicated the
judgment that was coming to "this generation" (24:34), the generation of
His day (Isa. 56:7; Jer. 7:11).
This was the second-time Jesus had cleansed the temple (John 2:14;
21:12-14). In His office as Priest, Jesus was following the law regarding the
leprous house. If the owner finds red or green indentations on the walls, the
priest is called to inspect the house. Before he enters, the house is emptied
so the possible infection does not affect the contents and make them
unclean (Lev. 14:34-36). If during the inspection he finds "the mark on the
walls of the house has greenish or reddish depressions and appears deeper
than the surface, then the priest shall come out of the house, to the doorway,
and quarantine the house for seven days" (vv. 3738). On the seventh day,
the priest makes another inspection.

If the mark has indeed spread in the walls of the house, then the priest
shall order them to tear out the stones with the mark in them and throw
them away at an unclean place outside the city. He shall have the
house scraped all around inside, and they shall dump the plaster that
they scrape off at an unclean place outside the city. Then they shall
take other stones and replace those stones, and he shall take other
plaster and replaster the house (Lev. 14:39-42).

After this is done, the priest makes one final inspection. "If he sees that the
mark has indeed spread in the house, it is a malignant mark in the house; it
is unclean. He shall therefore tear down the house, its stones, and its
timbers, and all the plaster of the house, and he shall take them outside the
city to an unclean place" (14:44-45).
After the completion of Herod's temple in AD 63, the ascended Christ
makes a final inspection and declares it to be unclean because the Old
Covenant sacrificial system was still operating. God's perfect sacrifice was
being rejected for the continued sacrifice of animals, "for it is impossible
for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins" (Heb. 10:4). Probably
stunned at the definitive tone of Jesus' words, the disciples asked Jesus a
three-part question about the future destruction of the temple.

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 OF THE AGE?"

The disciples clearly equated the destruction of the temple with Jesus'
"coming" in judgment, which would result in "the end of the age." Thomas
Ice, a futurist, agrees: "The disciples apparently thought that all three
elements — the destruction of the Temple, the sign of Christ's coming, and
the end of the age — would occur at the same time." Ice then argues that
the disciples "were wrong to relate the impending judgment upon Jerusalem
and the Temple with the return of Messiah." He says that "it was common
for Jesus to correct the disciples."13 If Jesus set out to correct the disciples
in His response to the disciples' questions, as He had done on other
occasions, He did not do a very good job. Why didn't He say, "You are
mistaken about linking these events" or "You are mistaken, not knowing the
Scriptures" (see Matt. 22:29; Luke 9:33; Acts 1:7-8))?
Why did Jesus use language throughout the discourse that indicates a
first-century fulfillment by using "this generation" (Matt. 24:34) and the
second person plural if He meant to separate the events of that generation
from a long distant future generation? Jesus linked "the sign of your
coming" and "end of the age" by using a single definite article. Jesus did
not say, as many translations have it, "the sign of your coming and of the
end of the age" (Matt. 24:3).14 It literally reads, "the sign of your coming
and end of age."15 They are linked to that generation alone.
Jesus told His disciples that their generation would see the events leading
up to and including the judgment on Jerusalem and the destruction of the
temple. Each time Jesus uses the phrase "this generation," He always uses it
as a reference to the generation to whom He is speaking. There are no
exceptions (Matt. 11:16; 12:41, 42, 45; 23:36; Mark 8:12; Luke 7:31;
11:29, 30, 31, 32, 50, 51; 17:25; 21:32). This interpretive restriction on the
meaning of "this generation" also applies to "an evil and adulterous
generation" (Matt. 12:39; 16:4; Mark 8:38), "you unbelieving and perverted
generation" (Matt. 17:17; Luke 9:41: notice the use of "you"), and
"unbelieving generation" (Mark 9:19). Even when Jesus uses the phrase
"evil and adulterous generation," He is referring to that first-century
generation, not some undesignated future generation (Matt. 12:38-45), as
the Jews post-Pentecost and beyond make clear (Acts 2:40; Phil. 2:15).
The Pharisees say to Jesus, "We want to see a sign" (12:38). Jesus
answers, "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign" (v. 39). That
made their generation an evil and adulterous generation since they are the
ones asking for a sign. Even so, Jesus gives them a sign, "the sign of Jonah
the prophet" (v. 39). And when was the sign of Jonah the prophet fulfilled?
It was in their day (v. 40). The meaning of "this generation" throughout
Matthew 12 (vv. 41-42) is used by Jesus to point out how their generation
will be judged by the people of Nineveh and the Queen of the South
because someone greater than Jonah and Solomon "is here." The "is here"
was in Jesus' day since only those people living in Jesus' day could actually
see the sign of Jonah — the resurrection of Jesus.

The End of the "Age," Not the "World"

Matthew 24:3 reads more accurately, "the end of the age" (aiōn), not the
"end of the world" (kosmos) as some translations have it. The "end of the
age" refers to the expiration of a period of time that specifically applied to
the passing away of the Old Covenant era (Dan. 9:24-27; Matt. 15:24; Luke
24:27, 44). The writer of Hebrews described this time as "these last days,"
literally, "the end of these days" (Heb. 1:1-2), "the consummation of the
ages" (9:26), as they saw "the day drawing near" (10:24). Even the authors
of the Left Behind series acknowledge this to be true:

This evidently refers to the days in which they were living, for in their
lifetime God had sent His Son to reveal His great love for mankind by
dying for our sins. That act of divine mercy spelled the end of the Old
Testament sacrificial system, which was being replaced by the new
and better covenant made possible by the blood of God's Son.16

Peter wrote that Jesus appeared in "these last times," literally, "at the end of
the times" (1 Pet. 1:20). He further stated that "the end of all things has
come near" (1 Pet. 4:7). Paul made the point "the ends of the ages have
come" (1 Cor. 10:11). The Old Covenant age was coming to an end and
was being made "obsolete" and in the process of disappearing because of
the work of Jesus Christ (Heb. 8:13). This resulted in the "age to come"
(Matt. 12:32), which incorporated believing Jews and Gentiles into the
blessings of the "new covenant in [Jesus'] blood" (Luke 22:20; cf. Jer.
31:31; Acts 10; Rom. 9-11; 1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor. 3:6; Eph. 2; Heb. 8:8, 13).
Jesus replaced the sacrificial system of bulls and goats with Himself as
the "Lamb of God" (John 1:29), the physical temple with "the temple of His
body" (John 2:13-22), a sanctuary built with hands with the "true
tabernacle" (Heb. 8:2; 9:11, 24; John 1:14), the earthly, sinful high priest
with Himself as the "perfect High Priest" (Heb. 2:17; 3:1; 5:1-10; 7:2628),
and earthly Jerusalem and Zion with heavenly Jerusalem and Zion (Gal.
4:21-31; Heb. 12:18-24). The "end of the age" refers to the last days of the
Old Covenant world that were passing away (1 Cor. 2:6; 1:20). The
destruction of the temple was the observable outward sign that the new
covenant had dawned.
After the disciples asked Jesus the questions about when He would come
in judgment to destroy the temple, He addressed the issue of signs and the
importance of not being misled by them. Like today, the people in Jesus'
day saw signs as a way of predicting the end of an era. These common signs
would not be the key they would need to determine when Jesus would come
in judgment. The key would be found in several uncommon signs that had
theological significance for those who knew the Scriptures.

The Parousia
The use of the word "coming" (παρουσία) in Matthew 24:3 does not mean
the physical "coming and going" of Jesus from heaven to earth but His
"presence" that would be manifested in judgment:

In this edition [of The Emphasized Bible] the word parousia is

uniformly rendered "presence" ("coming," as a representative of this
word, being set aside). The original term occurs twenty-four times in
the N.T., viz.: Mt. xxiv. 3, 27, 31, 39; 1 Cor. xv. 23; xvi. 17; 2 Cor. vii.
6, 7; x. 10; Phil. i. 26; ii. 12; 1 Thess. ii. 19; iii. 3; iv. 15; v. 23; 2
Thess. ii. 1, 8, 9; James v. 7, 8; 2 Pet. i. 16; iii. 4, 12 and 1 John ii. 28.
The sense of "presence" is so plainly shewn by the contrast with
"absence" (implied in 2 Cor. x. 10, and expressed in Phil. ii. 12) that
the question naturally arises, — Why not always so render it? The
more so, inasmuch as there is in 2 Pet. i. 16 also, a peculiar fitness in
our English word "presence." This passage, it will be remembered,
relates to our Lord's transformation upon the Mount [Matt. 17:1-13].
The wonderful manifestation there made was a display and sample of
"presence" rather than of "coming." The Lord was already there; and,
being there, he was transformed (cp. Mt. xvii. 2, n.) and the "majesty"
of his glorified person was then disclosed. His bodily "presence" was
one which implied and exerted "power"; so that "power and presence"
go excellently well together — the "power" befitting such a
"presence"; and the three favoured disciples were at one and the same
moment witnesses of both. The difficulty expressed in the notes to the
second edition of this N.T. in the way of so yielding to this weight of
evidence as to render parousia always by "presence," lay in the
seeming incongruity of regarding "presence" as an event which would
happen at a particular time and which would fall into rank as one of a
series of events, as 1 Co. xv. 23 especially appeared to require. The
translator still feels the force of this objection, but is withdrawn from
taking his stand upon it any longer by the reflection that, after all, the
 difficulty may be imaginary.17

Josephus (c. 37-c. 100) "uses 'parousia' for the theophany at Sinai and also
for God's almighty presence in history (Ant. 3.80, 202-3; 9.55; 18.284)."18
In this example, there was no physical presence of God, only His presence
of power and glory that all the Israelites observed with fear and trembling.
Robert Young, author of The Analytical Concordance to the Bible and A
Literal Translation of the Bible, remarks on Matthew 24:3: "AS HE [Jesus]
SAT,] lit. 'he sitting down upon the hill of the olives the disciples came
forward saying, Say to us, ... sign of thy presence (lit. being along-side,')
and of the full-end of the (Jewish) age? Not 'of the world,' as in the C.V."19
The commentary on Matthew in the Cambridge Bible for Schools and
Colleges series states, "The precise word 'coming,' or 'advent,' which the
Church has adopted in reference to the second 'presence' of Christ, does not
occur in this prophecy."20
Consider the marginal note in the NASB for 1 John 2:28: "Now, little
children, abide in Him, so that when He appears, we may have confidence
and not shrink away from Him in shame at His coming" (παρουσία) or "in
His presence." The same marginal note appears in 1 Thessalonians 2:19:
"For who is our hope or joy or crown of exultation? Is it not even you,
before our Lord Jesus at His coming" (παρουσία) or "presence"?
Jesus' presence is realized "where two or three have gathered together in
[His] name, [He is] there in their midst" (Matt. 18:20). Jesus is present but
not in a physical sense. He is really present even if He is not physically
present. Jesus said, "I am with you all the days" (Matt. 28:20). Jesus does
not have to be physically present for his presence to be a reality.
When Jesus came to bring judgment upon the temple and city of
Jerusalem, His presence was manifested. He was in the judgment sequence
of the destruction of the temple that He had predicted would take place
before their generation passed away. Some would still be alive to see it
(Matt. 16:2728). We will touch on the meaning of παρουσία again when we
examine Matthew 24:27: "For just as the lightning comes from the east and
flashes even to the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be." We will
also see that while "coming" is also used in Matthew 24:30, it's a different
word.

MATTHEW 24:4-5
JESUS ANSWERED AND SAID TO THEM, "SEE TO
IT THAT NO ONE MISLEADS YOU. FOR MANY
 IT THAT NO ONE MISLEADS YOU. FOR MANY
WILL COME IN MY NAME, SAYING, 'I AM THE
CHRIST,' AND WILL MISLEAD MANY."

Jesus was clearly addressing His first-century audience: "See to it that no

one misleads you... See that you are not frightened." Jesus warned the
generation of disciples who asked the question about the coming judgment,
not some unnamed generation in the distant future.

False Messiahs
Jesus warned His disciples to beware of false messiahs. Thomas Ice argues
that "there is scholarly consensus that there were not false Christs or
Messiahs until around A.D. 130."21 To support his claim, he cites the
following from a commentary published in 1878:

We possess no historical record of any false Messiahs having appeared

previous to the destruction of Jerusalem (Barcochba [Simon bar
Kokhba] did not make his appearance till the time of Hadrian); for
Simon Magus (Acts viii. 9), Theudas (Acts v. 36), the Egyptian (Acts
xxi. 38), Menander, Dositheus, who have been referred to as cases in
point (Theophylact, Euthymius Zigabenus, Grotius, Calovinus,
Bengel), did not pretend to be the Messiah. Comp. Joseph Antt. Xx. 5.
1; 8. 6; Bell. Ii. 13. 5.22

Is it true that there is no "scholarly consensus" that there were no false

Messiahs/Christs until around AD 130? F. F. Bruce writes that "there was
an increase in militant messianism in the period following A.D. 44."23
Josephus confirms this when he "records that while Fadus was procurator of
Judea a certain Theudas, who claimed to be a prophet, led a large number of
people out into the desert," one of the false signs about which Jesus warned
the disciples (Matt. 24:26) and that the Roman commander inquired of Paul
if he was "the Egyptian who some time ago stirred up a revolt and led the
four thousand men of the Assassins out into the wilderness" (Acts 21:38).24
Theudas "told them that by his command the Jordan river would part and
they would walk across in safety.25 But Fadus dispatched a troop of cavalry
that killed or captured most of them and rode back to Jerusalem bearing the
severed head of Theudas."26
During the reign of Nero, Josephus writes that "imposters and deceivers
persuaded the multitude to follow them into the wilderness and pretended
that they would exhibit wonders and signs. One prophet "advised the
multitude of the common people to go along with him to the Mount of
Olives" imitating the prophecy made by Jesus that "the walls of Jerusalem
would fall down" but that they could enter "into the city through those
walls, when they were fallen down."27 Christian Hebrew scholar John
Lightfoot (1602-1675) wrote:

False Christs broke out, and appeared in public with their witchcrafts,
so much the frequenter and more impudent, as the city and people
drew nearer to its ruin; because the people believed the Messias should
be manifested before the destruction of the city; and each of them
pretended to be the Messias by these signs."28

Grant R. Osborne writes, "[t]hese pretenders appeared often in the first

century and throughout the history of the church...."29 New Testament
commentator R. T. France also argues that there were false Christs leading
up to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70:

The catastrophic situation in Jerusalem during those last days before

its capture will provide a fertile breeding-ground for the sort of
messianic claimants already predicted in vv. 5 and 11 as part of the
more general upheaval of the period before the siege. Anyone who
offered new hope of divine intervention would be eagerly listened to,
and the more so if they were able to offer "signs and wonders" to
support their claim. And such miraculous proofs were, according to
Josephus, offered by several of the nationalist leaders he mentions: he
cites specifically the parting of the Jordan (Ant. 20.97), the collapse of
the city walls (Ant. 20:170), the uncovering of Moses' sacred vessels
(Ant. 18:85), as well as more generally "conspicuous wonders and
signs" (Ant. 20:168) and God-given "signs of freedom" (War
2:2.259).30

In a footnote, France writes, "Such 'false Messiahs and false prophets'

active during the siege might include Simon bar-Giora (Josephus, War
4:503-44 etc.), who was regarded as a 'king' (510) ... and also 'many' false
prophets noted anonymously in War 6.285-88; that last passage goes on to
relate (6.289-300) a series of signs and wonders occurring in the period
before the city was destroyed, which some took (wrongly) to be omens of
deliverance."31
There were so many impostors preying on the gullibility of the people
that under the procuratorship of Felix (Acts 23:24), "many of them were
apprehended and killed every day. They seduced great numbers of the
people still expecting the Messiah; and well therefore might our Saviour
caution his disciples against them."32
Larry Spargimino, who writes that "false messiahs were not limited to the
first century,"33 infers correctly by this statement that there were false
Messiahs in the first century. Alexander Keith, in his study of the first-
century destruction of Jerusalem, wrote that "Dositheus, the Samaritan,
pretended that he was the lawgiver prophesied of by Moses."34 This would
have made him a pseudo-messianic figure.
Josephus does not describe these impostors as "Messiahs." A study of his
works will show that he "consistently avoided using the term Χριστὸς to
such a degree that "it occurs in the whole of his writings only in two places
where he (or his reviser) uses it as a title for Jesus (Ant. 18:63; 20.200). So
if any of these people did make specifically messianic claims, we would not
expect Josephus to have recorded them as such."35
Of course, there might have been false messiahs that never got their
names in the history books of that era. "Josephus gives the impression that"
those he listed "are only a selection." He writes that there were "many."

[T]he generation before the destruction [of the Temple in AD 70]

witnessed a remarkable outburst of Messianic emotionalism. This is to
be attributed, as we shall see, not to an intensification of Roman
persecution, but to the prevalent belief induced by the popular
chronology of that day that [for Jews] the age was on the threshold of
the Millennium ... When Jesus came into Galilee "spreading the gospel
of the Kingdom of God and saying the time is fulfilled and the
Kingdom of God is at hand," he was voicing the opinion universally
held that the year 5000 in the Creation calendar, which is to usher in
the sixth millennium — the age of the Kingdom of God — was at
hand. It was this chronologic fact which inflamed the Messianic hope
of the people rather than the Roman persecutions. There is no evidence
anywhere to show that the political fortunes of the people in the
second quarter of the first century of the common era — the period of
many Messianic movements — were in any degree lower than those in
the first quarter, in which no Messianic movements are recorded.36
It's hard to understand how Ice can claim that there were no messianic
figures in the generational period prophesied by Jesus to the lead up to the
razing of the temple in AD 70. All the evidence is against such an opinion.
"As the crisis approached in the life of the nation with the sack of Jerusalem
and the destruction of the Temple, the Messianic excitement of the people
was at fever heat. While the Temple was burning a prophet appeared
announcing that the Messiah was at hand."37 James Jordan adds to the
discussion by referencing the Judaizing heresy that was prevalent in the
time before Jerusalem's demise:

There is plenty of evidence in the Scriptures ... that there was a group
of Christian leaders who claimed to have the anointing (messiah) of
apostles, who claimed to be prophets and teachers, and who did indeed
mislead many believers. They were a constant danger in the apostolic
era, and a great deal of Paul's writings in particular deal with their
deceptions. We are thinking, of course, of the Judaizers.
The Judaizers were the heirs of the tradition-serving Jewish teachers
who were Jesus' worst enemy. The Judaizers are the constant enemy in
Acts and the epistles. They are the anti-christs of the Johannine letters,
who claimed to have been sent out by the apostles but who were not
"of us" (1 John 2:18-19; 4:1). They are the main enemy in the book of
Revelation [Rev. 2:9; 3:9].
The Judaizers fit perfectly Jesus' predictions. They claimed to come
in His name. They misled many. They claimed an anointing, but it was
false. They were false prophets.38

To bring this section to a conclusion, Ice is mistaken in his claim that "there
is scholarly consensus that there were not false Christs or Messiahs until
around A.D. 130." There is plenty of evidence if someone knows where to
look.

1. Gary DeMar, "The Myth that the Temple Needs to be Rebuilt," 10

Popular Prophecy Myths Exposed and Answered: The Last Days Might Not
be as Near as You Think (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision Press,
2010), chap. 7.
2. Gary DeMar, “Flavius Josephus and Preterism,” The War of the
Jews: The Battle Over the End Times (Powder Springs, GA: American
Vision Press, 2014), chap. 5.
 3. Adam Clarke, Commentary on the New Testament, 3 vols.
(Cincinnati: H. S. & J. Applegate & Co, 1851), 218-219.
4. Michael Wilkins, “Apologetics Commentary on the Gospel of
Mark,” The Holman Apologetics Commentary on the Bible: The Gospels
and Acts, Gen. Ed., Jeremy Royal Howard (Nashville: B&H Publishing
Group, 2013), 284.
5. Gaalya Cornfield, ed., Josephus: The Jewish War (Grand Rapids,
MI: Zondervan, 1982), 6.5.1 §§271-76.
6. Thomas Ice and Randall Price, Ready to Rebuild: The Imminent
Plan to Rebuild the Last Days Temple (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1992),
197-198.
7. Ice and Price, Ready to Rebuild, 198. The eschatological position of
Ice and Demy requires that the 70th week (7 years) of Daniel's prophecy
found in Daniel 9:24-27 be separated from the 69 weeks (483 years), and
the prophecy clock won't start again until something called the "rapture of
the church" takes place. Just as there is no support for another rebuilt
temple, there is no biblical support for a nearly 2000-year gap in time
between the 69th and 70th weeks of Daniel's prophecy or the claim that the
church will be "raptured" before (pre), in the middle of (mid), at the end
(post), partially (partial), or before God's wrath is poured out (pre-wrath), a
seven-year tribulation period.
8. Merrill F. Unger, Great Neglected Bible Prophecies (Chicago:
Scripture Press Books, 1955), 23.
9. For an exposition of 2 Thessalonians 2, see Gary DeMar, Last Days
Madness: The Obsession of the Modern Church, 4th ed. (Powder Springs,
GA: American Vision, 1999), chaps. 22-23.
10. Carl Friedrich Keil, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of
Ezekiel, trans. James Martin, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1970),
2:122. Quoted in Unger, Great Neglected Bible Prophecies, 23.
11. Timothy J. Geddert, Watchwords: Mark 13 in Markan Eschatology
(Sheffield, England: JSOT, 1989). Quoted in Peter W. L. Walker, Jesus and
the Holy City: New Testament Perspectives on Jerusalem (Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 9.
12. Walker, Jesus and the Holy City, 8.
13. Thomas Ice, "The Olivet Discourse" The End Times Controversy:
The Second Coming Under Attack, eds. Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice
(Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2003), 155.
14. Daniel B. Wallace, Granville Sharp's Canon and Its Kin:
Semantics and Significance (New York: Peter Lang, 2009), 187-197.
15. R.T. France, The Gospel According to Matthew: An Introduction
and Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1985), 337.
16. Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, Are We Living in The Last Days?
(Wheaton, IL: Tyndale Publishers, 1999), 17.
17. Joseph Bryant Rotherham, The Emphasized Bible, 3rd ed. (Grand
Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1984), Appendix, 271.
18. Martin Karrer, "Parousia," The Encyclopedia of Christianity, eds.
Erwin Fahlbusch and Geoffrey William Bromiley, 5 vols. (Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 4:47.
19. Robert Young, Concise Critical Comments on the Holy Bible
(London: Pickering & Inglis, n.d.), 24.
20. Arthur Carr, The Gospel According to St. Matthew, rev. ed.
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1902), 128.
21. Thomas Ice, "Answers and Clarifications for Gary DeMar," Pre-
Trib Research Center: https://goo.gl/TZwsOh
22. Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to The Gospel of
Matthew, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1879), 2:128.

23. New Testament History (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1969), 338.
24. Mention is made of a Theudas in Acts 5:36: "For some time ago
Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a group of about four
hundred men joined up with him. But he was killed, and all who followed
him were dispersed and came to nothing." Bruce writes, "The Theudas of
Acts 5:36 is dated earlier, before the rising of Judas the Galilaean (therefore
perhaps c. 4 B.C.)." New Testament History, 338, note 10. Theudas could
be a title rather than a name. Theudas is a contraction of Theodorus and has
several meanings: "gift of God," "God-given," and "flowing with water." J.
Gresham Machen writes, "The Theudas who is mentioned in Josephus is
different, for his insurrection did not occur till about A. D. 44, after the time
of Gamaliel's speech. Gamaliel was referring to some insurrection of an
earlier period. The name Theudas was common, and so were tumults and
insurrections." The Literature and History of New Testament Times: The
Historical Background of Christianity, the Early History of Christianity
(Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication and Sabbath Schools
Work, 1915), 52-53.
25. There are parallels between Moses and Jesus, so it's not surprising
that false Messiahs would attempt to replicate their actions. "Jesus returned
from the Jordan and was led around by the Spirit in the wilderness" (Luke
4:1; Matt. 4:1-11). Moses spent 40 years in the wilderness and Jesus spent
40 days. Moses led the people safely through the Red Sea and Jesus walks
on water. Moses is saved from slaughter (Ex. 2:1-10) and so is Jesus (Matt.
2:13-18). For further parallels, see Dale C. Allison, The New Moses: A
Matthean Typology (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994).
26. David J. Palm, "The Signs of His Coming: An Examination of the
Olivet Discourse from a Preterist Perspective," Submitted to the Faculty at
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (June 1993), 80.
27. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews (20.8.6) and Wars of the Jews
(13.2.5).
28. John Lightfoot, A Commentary on the New Testament from the
Talmud and Hebraica: Matthew—1 Corinthians, 4 vols. (Oxford University
Press, 1859), 2:318. Also, see pages 317-318.
29. Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: Matthew (Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 887.
30. R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew: The New International
Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007),
916-917. Also, R.T. France, The Gospel of Mark: The New International
Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 510-
511.
31. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 916, note 72.
32. Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies, Which Have
Remarkably Been Fulfilled, and at This Time Are Fulfilling in the World
(London: J. F. Dove, 1754), 333.
33. Larry Spargimino, "How Preterists Misuse History to Advance
Their View of Prophecy," The End Times Controversy: The Second Coming
Under Attack, eds. Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice (Eugene, OR: Harvest
House, 2003), 210.
34. Alexander Keith, Evidence of the Truth of the Christian Religion,
Derived from the Literal Fulfillment of Prophecy; Particularly as
Illustrated by the History of the Jews and by the Discoveries of Recent
Travelers (Edinburgh: William Whyte & Co., 1844), 60.
35. France, The Gospel of Mark, 511.
36. Abba Hillel Silver, A History of Messianic Speculation in Israel:
From the First Through the Seventeenth Centuries (New York: Macmillan
Publishing Co., 1927), 5-6.
37. Silver, A History of Messianic Speculation in Israel, 7.
38. James B. Jordan, An Extended Historical, Literary, Theological,
and Homiletical Commentary Upon the Eschatological Discourse of Jesus
Christ... (unpublished manuscript). "These false Christs (Matthew 24:24;
Mark 13:22) are necessarily antichrists…." A.T. Robinson, Word Pictures
in the New Testament, 6 vols. (Nashville: Broadman, 1930), 6:215.
 THREE

Wars, Famines, Plagues, Earthquakes,

Signs in the Heavens

MATTHEW 24:6-8
"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. FOR NATION WILL
RISE AGAINST NATION, AND KINGDOM AGAINST
KINGDOM, AND IN VARIOUS PLACES THERE
WILL BE FAMINES AND EARTHQUAKES. BUT ALL
THESE THINGS ARE MERELY THE BEGINNING
OF BIRTH PANGS."

Wars and Rumors of Wars

Jesus next warned of "wars and rumors of wars" and the rise of "kingdom
against kingdom." Darrell L. Bock writes, "Matthew 24:6 appears to
suggest that these calamities are in the near future by noting that the
disciples 'are about' μελλήσετε (mellēsete) to hear of wars and rumors of
wars."1 "Are about to hear" is not an indicator of events in the distant
future. The Annals of Tacitus, covering the historical period from AD 14 to
the death of Nero in AD 68, describes the time with phrases such as
"disturbances in Germany," "commotions in Africa," "commotions in
Thrace," "insurrections in Gaul," "intrigues among the Parthians," "the war
in Britain," and "the war in Armenia." Wars were fought from one end of
the Roman Empire to the other in the days of the apostles.
The context of the Olivet Discourse requires that "wars and rumors of
wars" fit into the time frame of that era since Jesus said they would take
place before "this generation" passed away (24:34). The New Testament
itself does not mention Roman Empire-wide wars, but we know they took
place. Providentially, we have secular sources to help us fill in the historical
gaps.
Some will argue that global wars are what Jesus has in view in the Olivet
Discourse. "[R]ather than the local war in Judea, the account in Matthew
depicts something on a much broader scale. In the words of Craig Evans,
'the expectation of global warfare and chaos... However, there were no
major wars prior to the Jewish revolt.'"2 The key word here is "global."
Jesus was not predicting global warfare, otherwise why direct the people of
Jerusalem to flee to the mountains (Matt. 24:16)? If Jesus was describing a
global war, there wouldn't be any place to escape.
Jesus is clear on the subject: "You will be hearing of wars and rumors of
wars." Jesus identifies the audience that would hear about these wars, both
real and rumored. He couldn't be any clearer.
It's important not to read modern-day conceptions of war into the Bible.
The Greek word polemos can mean anything from personal (James 4:1) to
armed conflict (Heb. 11:34) and everything in between, including wars
against Christians (Rev. 11:7; 12:17; 13:7). Were there such conflicts in the
apostolic era prior to the destruction of Jerusalem?

In A.D. 40 there was a disturbance at Mesopotamia which (Josephus

says) caused the deaths of more than 50,000 people. In A.D. 49 a
tumult at Jerusalem at the time of the Passover resulted in 10,000 to
20,000 deaths. At Caesarea contentions between Jewish people and
other inhabitants resulted in over 20,000 Jews being killed. As Jews
moved elsewhere, over 20,000 were destroyed by Syrians. At
Scythopolis, over 13,000 Jews were killed. Thousands were killed in
other places, and at Alexandria 50,000 were killed. At Damascus,
10,000 were killed in an hour's time.
These were not wars of a world-wide scope as we know the world
today. They were in Galilee, and in Syria, and in the areas east and
south of Judaea. And Judaea was in revolt against Rome, "while the
armies of Spain, Gaul and Germany, Illyricum and Syria, converged
 upon Italy, to decide who should succeed to Nero's purple."3

Notice the national identities: Spain, Gaul, and Germany. We find similar
national identities in the book of Acts existing in the context of the Roman
Empire: "Now there were Jews living in Jerusalem, devout men from every
nation under heaven" (Acts 2:5-13). Paul was planning to go to Spain
(Rom. 15:24-28). Paul had written that the gospel had been "made known
to all the nations" (16:27-28).
The Roman historian Tacitus (AD 56-117) writes the following of the
period:

I am entering on the history of a period rich in disasters, frightful in its

wars, torn by civil strife, and even in peace full of horrors... There
were three civil wars; there were more with foreign enemies; there
were often wars that had both characters at once... There were
disturbances in Illyricum; Gaul wavered in its allegiance; Britain was
thoroughly subdued and immediately abandoned; the tribes of the
Suevi and the Sarmatae rose in concert against us; the Dacians had the
glory of inflicting as well as suffering defeat; the armies of Parthia
were all but set in motion by the cheat of a counterfeit Nero.4

Even though Tacitus describes these conflicts as "wars," "civil strife," and
"civil wars," H. Wayne House argues that "the conflicts within the Roman
Empire were not really wars between kingdoms and nations in the first-
century A.D., as described in the Olivet Discourse." Contrary to House's
claim, nations dominated by Rome still considered themselves to be nations
and kingdoms. Israel is a perfect example, a point Pilate and his fellow
Romans understood:

Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor questioned
Him, saying, "Are You the King of the Jews?" And Jesus said to him,
"It is as you say" (Matt. 27:11; also see vv. 37, 42 and John 19:14-15,
19, 21).

Israel was a separate nation under the control of the Roman Empire. The
high priest Caiaphas said the following about the work of Jesus and how it
would affect the Jewish nation:

"[I]t is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the
 whole nation not perish." Now he did not say this on his own
initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was
going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order
that He might also gather together into one the children of God who
are scattered abroad (John 11:50-52).

It's not any different today. Nations within the former Soviet orbit thought
of themselves as separate nations even though they had been conquered by
the Communist regime. Since the break-up of the Soviet Union, they have
regained their sovereign nation status! They retained their national identity
while under the boot of the Soviets.
What about kingdoms? We rarely use the word "kingdom" today to
represent political entities, but the use of the word does fit well with the
biblical era. Adam Clarke writes:

Kingdom against kingdom] This portended the open wars of different

tetrarchies and provinces against each other. 1st. That of the Jews and
Galileans against the Samaritans, for the murder of some Galileans
going up to feast of Jerusalem, while Cumanus was procurator. 2dly.
That of the whole nation of Jews against the Romans and Agrippa
other allies of the Roman empire; which began when Gessius Florus
was procurator. 3dly. That of the civil war in Italy, while Otho and
Vitellius were contending for the empire. It is worthy of remark, that
the Jews themselves say, "In the time of the Messiah, wars shall be
stirred up in the world; nation shall rise against nation, and city against
city." Sohar Kadash. "Again, Rab. Eleazar, the son of Abina, said,
When ye see kingdom rising against kingdom, then expect the
immediate appearance of Messiah." Bereshith Rabba sect. 42.5

Wars and rumors of wars and kingdom against kingdom were a lead-up to
Jesus' coming in judgment in that generation.

Famines
Jesus told His disciples that famines would be another sign. Famines were
prevalent in the period prior to Jerusalem's destruction in AD 70. "Now at
this time some prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. And one of
them named Agabus stood up and began to indicate by the Spirit that there
would certainly be a great famine all over the world [oikoumenē]. And this
took place in the reign of Claudius. And in the proportion that any of the
disciples had means, each of them determined to send a contribution for the
relief of the brethren living in Judea" (Acts 11:27-29).
Take note of the fact that like in Luke 2:1 and Matthew 24:14, the Greek
word often translated "world" is oikoumenē, not kosmos and means
"inhabited earth" and refers to the political boundary of the Roman Empire.
The book of Acts is not describing a worldwide famine any more than the
famine in the book of Genesis was global (41:53-42:1-7). The Hebrew word
eretz is used numerous times and most often it means "land." Even so, the
New American Standard translation translates eretz as 'land" (41:53, 54, 55,
56; 42:5, 6, 7), "ground" (42:6), and "earth" (41:56, 57). The people "of all
the earth" did not come to Egypt to buy grain (41:57). How could starving
people from around the world get there? The famine in Acts 11 was no
more extensive than the tax mentioned in Luke 2:1.

Suetonius tells us that there were a succession of famines during the

reign of Claudius.6 This is corroborated by other Roman historians
who speak of scanty crops, and consequent famine that was "regarded
as a token of calamity."7 Eusebius also mentions this time of scarcity
that, according to him, affected "the whole world."8 Judea was hit
particularly hard9 and the New Testament records the efforts of the
early church to ease the hardship caused by this famine [Acts 11:27-
30; Rom. 15:25-26; 1 Cor. 16:1-3].10

Famine and disease are often the result of war. Josephus records a story of a
woman, so desperate for food during the siege of Jerusalem by the Romans,
that she cooked and ate her own child. Adam Clarke references Josephus in
his commentary on Leviticus 26:29 that has parallels with 2 Kings 6:29:
"Further, you will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters
you will eat."

Ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, etc. — This was literally fulfilled at
the siege of Jerusalem. Josephus, Wars of the Jews ... gives us a
particular instance in dreadful detail of a woman named Mary,11 who,
in the extremity of the famine during the siege, killed her sucking
child, roasted, and had eaten part of it when discovered by the soldiers!
See this threatened, Jer. xix. 9.12

There's a curious law in the Bible that states, "You are not to boil a young
goat in the milk of its mother" (Ex. 23:19; 34:26; Deut. 14:21). Modern-day
Jews apply this to not mixing meat with dairy products, something the text
does not prohibit. In fact, the text does not even prohibit Jews from boiling
a kid in milk. What does it mean?

Jerusalem is the mother of the seed (Ps. 87:5; Gal. 4:26ff.). When
Jerusalem crucified Jesus Christ, her Seed, she was boiling her kid in
her own milk. In Revelation 17, the apostate Jerusalem has been
devouring her faithful children: "And I saw the woman drunk with the
blood of the saints and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus." Her
punishment, under the Law of Equivalence, is to be devoured by the
gentile kings who supported her (v. 17).13

In terms of reciprocity, the mothers of Israel would consume their own

children similar to how the people of Israel consumed Jesus, the Son of God
who was their deliverer (Matt. 27:25).

Earthquakes
In Matthew 24:7, Jesus also spoke of earthquakes that would take place in
their generation. A great earthquake occurred at the time of Jesus'
crucifixion (Matt. 27:54) and another one at His resurrection (28:2). The
Bible records "a great earthquake" that shook "the foundations of the prison
house" that resulted in the release of Paul and Silas and the other prisoners
(Acts 16:26). According to historical accounts, earthquakes were common
for that time period, as they are for our time and all time. There were
earthquakes in Crete, Smyrna, Miletus, Chios, Samos, Laodicea, Hierapolis,
Colossae, Campania, Rome, and Judea. The cities of Pompeii and
Herculaneum were almost destroyed by an earthquake in AD 62, seventeen
years before the cities were wiped off the face of the earth by a volcanic
eruption from Mount Vesuvius. Josephus records a great earthquake that
struck Jerusalem.

[F]or there broke out a prodigious storm in the night, with the utmost
violence, and very strong winds, with the largest showers of rain, with
continued lightnings, terrible thunderings, and amazing concussions
and bellowings of the earth, that was in an earthquake. These things
were a manifest indication that some destruction was coming upon
men, when the system of the world was put into this disorder; and any
one would guess that these wonders foreshowed some grand calamities
 that were coming.14

In Revelation 11:13 we read, "And in that hour there was a great

earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell; and seven thousand people were
killed in the earthquake, and the rest were terrified and gave glory to the
God of heaven." The temple was still standing when John recorded this
event (11:1-2). For us, this great earthquake is a past event and is another
fulfillment of what Jesus predicted in the Olivet Discourse.
Many prophecy writers argue that an increase in earthquakes is a sign of
the end. There is no mention of an increase in the frequency or intensity of
earthquakes in what Jesus says, only that they will occur "in various places"
before "this generation," that is, the generation of Jesus' day, passed away.
As history records, Jesus' prophecy came to pass as He stated it would.
News of earthquakes in our day hold prophetic significance for many
Christians "because we are to such an extent 'strangers to the past,' [thus]
we easily read into the events and circumstances of our own day a
distinctiveness and uniqueness that may not actually be there."15 Much of
the speculative nature of today's Bible prophecy hysteria can be linked to
"generational provincialism," that is, the belief that nothing has prophetic
significance unless it happens to our generation. Many who take this
approach seem to be unaware that wars, earthquakes, famines, and plagues
have been a part of the human condition since the fall.
Modern date setters do acknowledge past great earthquakes. But to make
our generation unique in the annals of Bible prophecy, those engaged in
predicting the time of the end assert that we should calculate the frequency
and magnitude of earthquakes. Again, the present must be seen as unusual
to make the prophetic system work. Hal Lindsey wrote:

There have been many great earthquakes throughout history, but,

according to surprisingly well-kept records, in the past they did not
occur very frequently. The 20th century, however, has experienced an
unprecedented increase in the frequency of these calamities. In fact,
the number of earthquakes per decade has roughly doubled in each of
the 10-year periods since 1950."16

In 1997, he wrote, "Earthquakes continue to increase in frequency and

intensity, just as the Bible predicts for the last days before the return of
Christ."17 In 1994, he published similar statistics in the first edition of
Planet Earth 2000 A.D. The source for Lindsey's statistics is the
authoritative United States Geological Survey in Boulder, Colorado. "But
he does not give details of the report (report name, author, date, location,
etc.)." Steven A. Austin and Mark L. Strauss, in "Earthquakes and the End
Times: A Geological and Biblical Perspective," refute the claim that there
has been an increase in the number of earthquakes in the periods stated by
the above prophecy writers. In fact, the authors conclude, "Graphical plots
of global earthquake frequency indicate overall a decreasing frequency of
earthquakes."18
Geologist Charles F. Richter, former President of the Seismological
Society of America and developer of the Richter Scale, stated the following
in 1969:

One notices with some amusement that certain religious groups have
picked this rather unfortunate time to insist that the number of
earthquakes is increasing. In part, they are misled by the increasing
number of small earthquakes that are being cataloged and listed by
newer, more sensitive stations throughout the world. It is worth
remarking that the number of great earthquakes from 1896 to 1906
(about twenty-five) was greater than in any ten-year interval since.19

The way some prophecy analysts talk, only a dozen or so major earthquakes
have been recorded over the centuries. This is far from the truth. The
Roman writer Seneca, before his death in AD 65, stated that frequent
earthquakes had been a characteristic of the ancient world: "How often have
cities in Asia, how often in Achaia, been laid low by a single shock of
earthquake! How many towns in Syria, how many in Macedonia, have been
swallowed up! How often has this kind of devastation laid Cyprus in ruins!
How often has Paphos collapsed! Not infrequently are tidings brought to us
of the utter destruction of entire cities."20 Notice the date of Seneca's
writing — AD 65 — five years before the destruction of Jerusalem. After
AD 70, earthquakes no longer have the same prophetic significance.
Today's reported earthquakes are not unique, as proven by a thorough
study of history. The greatest student of earthquakes was a Frenchman,
Count F. Montessus de Ballore. From 1885 to 1922, he devoted his time to
studying and cataloging of known earthquakes and came to an astonishing
conclusion. He cataloged 171,434 earthquakes from the earliest historic
times! "The manuscript is stored in the library of the Geographical Society
in Paris, where it occupies 26 meters (over 84 feet) of bookshelves."21
 As much as some might want to believe that we are the "rapture
generation" or the "terminal generation," there is no statistical or biblical
evidence to support such a contention based on earthquakes.

Roaring of the Sea and Waves

Tim LaHaye mentions hurricanes as signs of the last days. A great deal of
attention was paid to the number of hurricanes that struck the United States
in 2005. Climatologists argued that 2005 was a trend and prophecy writers
like LaHaye assured their readers that such storms are a fulfillment of Luke
21:25: "There will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth
dismay among nations, in perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the
waves." The spate of hurricanes turned out not to be a trend. In fact, a study
of the history of massive storms goes back to the time of recorded history.
They are common occurrences.
In context, the prophecy in Luke 21 is a reference to what was going to
take place before the generation to whom Jesus was speaking passed away
(Luke 21:32). There were storms prior to Jerusalem's destruction in AD 70.
We often forget the violent storm on the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 8:23-27;
Mark 4:35-41; Luke 8:22-25). Luke describes a massive storm where the
passengers did not see the sun or stars "for many days" (Acts 27:20). The
ship finally ran aground where it was "broken up by the force of the waves"
(27:41). The Roman historian Tacitus describes a series of similar events in
AD 65:

Campania was devastated by a hurricane ... the fury of which extended

to the vicinity of the City, in which a violent pestilence was carrying
away every class of human beings ... houses were filled with dead
bodies, the streets with funerals.22

The natural disasters described by Matthew, Mark, and Luke in the Olivet
Discourse pointed specifically to the coming of Jesus in judgment upon
Jerusalem before that first-century generation passed away. The
Mediterranean Sea floor is littered with ships that broke apart and sank
because of "the roaring of the sea and the waves."
Are tsunamis something new? Not at all. The August 27th, 1883 eruption
of Krakatoa resulted in the deaths of 40,000 people, almost all of whom
died from 100-foot tsunamis generated by the shock waves. Through
eyewitness accounts it was reported that the explosion was heard thousands
of miles away, and the eruption's shock wave traveled around the globe.
The effects of the disaster were far-reaching and long-lasting:

Beyond the purely physical horrors of an event that has only very
recently been properly understood, the eruption changed the world in
more ways than could possibly be imagined. Dust swirled round the
planet for years, causing temperatures to plummet and sunsets to turn
vivid with lurid and unsettling displays of light. The effects of the
immense waves were felt as far away as France. Barometers in Bogota
and Washington, D.C., went haywire. Bodies were washed up in
Zanzibar. The sound of the island's destruction was heard in Australia
and India and on islands thousands of miles away.23

It's been reported that the December 26, 2004 "catastrophic tsunami was
caused by the fourth most powerful undersea earthquake on record." This
means there were three others that were more powerful that we know about
and possibly others that we don't know about. Many people are unaware
that warning markers going back 600 years had been placed as reminders to
future generations of the danger of tsunamis:

"A house on high ground will lead to peace and happiness for
posterity," reads the inscription on the stone, which was erected after a
massive tsunami in 1933 killed thousands along the rugged Pacific
coast.
"Remember the calamity of the great tsunami. Never build houses
from this point down.... No matter how many years pass, keep
vigilance high," says the ominous warning carved into the one-metre
(three-foot) tall stone.24

There is an additional point to consider. Luke 21:25 "may figuratively

signify tumult among the nations (compare Is 17:12; Rev 17:15)."25
Consider the full context:

[T]there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people;
and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive into
all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the
nations until the times of the nations are fulfilled. There will be signs
in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth dismay among nations, in
perplexity at the roaring of the sea and the waves, men fainting from
fear and the expectation of the things which are coming upon the
 world; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken (Luke 21:24-26).

This great distress is limited to "the land" and "this people." It's a local
event fought with swords. Notice the subsequent horror. "This people ...
will be led captive into all the nations." Jerusalem, not the world, will be
"trampled underfoot by the nations until the times of the nations are
fulfilled." "Coming upon the world" is inaccurate. The Greek word used is
oikoumenē, a reference to limited geography (Luke 2:1; Acts 11:28; Rev.
3:10).
What is the meaning of "until the times of the nations are fulfilled"? The
"times of the nations" (Gentiles) are

manifestly times of judgment upon Jerusalem, not times of salvation to

the Gentiles. The most natural and obvious parallel is Rev. xi. 2, where
the outer court of the temple is said to be "given to the Gentiles," by
whom the holy city shall be trodden down forty-two months, a period
equivalent to the "time and times and half a time" of Rev. xii, 14, and
of Dan. vii, 25; xii, 7. This is a symbolical period of judgment (see
above, p. 384 [in Biblical Hermeneutics], but does not denote ages and
generations. It is three and a half — a divided seven, a short but signal
period of woe. The "times of the Gentiles," therefore, are the three and
a half times (approximating three and a half years) during which the
Gentile armies besieged and trampled down Jerusalem."26

Rome was the superpower that used its swords and war machines against
Jerusalem. Jews were "led captive into all the nations" after the destruction
of the temple in AD 70.
The first beast in Revelation came "up out of the sea" (13:1). This was
first-century Rome. We find something similar in the book of Daniel: "And
four great beasts were coming up from the sea..." (7:3). Beasts represent
rulers (kings). "The sea represents the Gentiles, and the four beasts
represent the idolatrous nations of the world: the lion-eagle is Babylon; the
bear is Persia; the leopard is Alexander's Greece, and the nightmare beast is
Rome." It was this fourth beast that the nation of Israel encountered in AD
70. "The Son of Man, however, takes dominion over them all, subduing
Satan's beasts permanently."27 Paul declares a similar understanding of the
principle when he writes, "The God of peace will soon crush Satan under
your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you" (Rom. 16:20).
Like so much of the material found in the Olivet Discourse, the
interpretive keys are found in the Old Testament.:

Alas, the uproar of many peoples

Who roar like the roaring of the seas,
And the rumbling of nations
Who rush on like the rumbling of mighty waters!
The nations rumble on like the rumbling of many waters,
But He will rebuke them and they will flee far away,
And be chased like chaff in the mountains before the wind,
Or like whirling dust before a gale (Isa. 17:12-13).

In Revelation 17:15, "The waters which you saw where the harlot sits [v.
1], are peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues." Similar symbolic
language is found in Isaiah 8:7; Jeremiah 47:2. "The roaring of the seas,"
therefore, is most likely an allusion to the foreign armies of Rome that
sacked, burned, and dismantled the temple and brought destruction on
Jerusalem.

Plagues
Luke's version of the destruction of the temple includes "plagues" and
"great signs from heaven" (Luke 21:11). Plagues in the ancient world were
common, as they were centuries later, for example, the Black Death or
Bubonic Plague (1347-1351). "The total number of deaths worldwide is
estimated at 75 million people, approximately 25-50 million of which
occurred in Europe. The plague is thought to have returned every
generation with varying virulence and mortalities until the 1700s. During
this period, more than 100 plague epidemics swept across Europe."28
Most likely people believed the end of the world was near for them. It
wasn't. As to plagues in the lead up to the destruction of the temple in AD
70, Josephus "mentions both pestilence and famine as the immediate
preludes of the storming of Jerusalem. They were due, like the plague at
Athens [430 BC], to the vast masses of people — Passover pilgrims — who
were at the time crowded in the city."29
The Roman historian Suetonius wrote that there was such a "pestilence"
at Rome during the reign of Nero that "within the space of one autumn there
died no less than thirty thousand persons, as appeared from the registers in
the temple of Libitina."30 Tacitus also confirms pestilences and much more
prior to AD 70:
 A year of shame and of so many evil deeds heaven also marked by
storms and pestilence. Campania was devastated by a hurricane, which
destroyed everywhere country houses, plantations and crops, and
carried its fury to the neighborhood of Rome, where a terrible plague
was sweeping away all classes of human beings without any such
derangement of the atmosphere as to be visibly apparent. Yet the
houses were filled with lifeless forms and the streets with funerals.
Neither age nor sex was exempt from peril. Slaves and the free-born
populace alike were suddenly cut off, amid the wailings of wives and
children, who were often consumed on the very funeral pile of their
friends by whom they had been sitting and shedding tears.31

During the near end of what Jesus had prophesied, Josephus records the
horror that was left behind:

Thus did the miseries of Jerusalem grow worse and worse every day,
and the seditious were still more irritated by the calamities they were
under, even while the famine preyed upon themselves, after it had
preyed upon the people. And indeed, the multitude of carcasses that
lay in heaps one upon another was a horrible sight, and produced a
pestilential stench, which was a hindrance to those that would make
sallies out of the city, and fight the enemy.32

Signs in the Heavens

Signs in the heavens were also evident during this period. The appearance
of a comet was often taken as a warning of some approaching calamity or a
sign of change in existing political structures: "It is a disorder of the
heavens 'importing change of times and states,' as William Shakespeare put
it, and is bad news, especially for eminent persons."33 For example, a comet
appeared in the sky in 44 BC, the year of Julius Caesar's assassination.
Another comet appeared in 11 BC. This time it was thought to have had
something to do with the death of Marcus Agrippa, a Roman statesman who
died the year before. We know that the "star in the east" was a sign of joy
for the magi, but it was a bad omen for Herod who feared political
competition (Matt. 2:1-12).
Were there any "signs from heaven" prior to AD 70 that would fulfill
what Jesus said in Luke 21:11?
 This was the Comet which St. Peter and Josephus saw over the City of
Jerusalem before the fall of the Holy City. Josephus wrote of it:
"Amongst other warnings, a Comet of the kind called Xiphias, because
their tails appear to represent the blade of a sword was seen above the
doomed city for the space of nearly a whole year.
Jerusalem was ravaged by pestilence and famine and soon afterward
was stormed by the Roman soldiery led by Titus. The Temple was
burned down and the streets of the Holy City ran with blood. It was the
end of Jerusalem and of the Jews as a free city and people.34

A comet appeared during the reign of Nero in AD 66, what we know today
as Halley's Comet which is visible from Earth around every 75 to 79 years.
The public speculated that some change in the political scene was imminent
when a comet or other stellar event occurred: "The historian Tacitus wrote:
'As if Nero were already dethroned, men began to ask who might be his
successor.'"35 Nero took the comet's "threat" seriously. In his Natural
History, Pliny the Elder (AD 23-79) "claimed that comets are stars that sow
terror," most likely a common belief at the time. Nero's "reign lived up to
the terrible omen."36 Nero murdered his mother, his two wives, and most of
his family, burned Rome, and used Christians as flaming torches. He knew
the intricacies of political intrigue. The appearance of a comet might just
give somebody an idea. "Nero took no chances as another historian,
Suetonius, related: 'All children of the condemned man, were banished from
Rome, and then starved to death or poisoned.' The policy worked like a
charm. Nero survived that comet by several years."37
Historians have linked the appearance of Halley's Comet not only with
the death of Nero in AD 68 but with the destruction of Jerusalem two years
later. A seventeenth-century print graphically depicts the phenomenon as it
passes over Jerusalem. The print is reproduced in Asimovs Guide to
Halley's Comet: The Awesome Story of Comets?38 The following caption
accompanies the print: "Halley's Comet of AD 66 shown over Jerusalem...
The Comet was regarded as an omen predicting the fall of the city [of
Jerusalem] to the Romans which actually occurred four years later."
Anyone reading either Matthew or Luke's version of Jesus' discourse of
what would befall the temple and the city of Jerusalem would have noted
these stellar phenomena as well as famines, earthquakes, and pestilence.
As mentioned above, in addition to Halley's Comet, "Josephus records39
that when the temple was ablaze, a bright star resembling a sword stood
over the city and that comets were visible for a year."40 He goes on to
describe other unusual phenomena as does Tacitus in his Histories (Book
5:13): "In the sky appeared a vision of armies in conflict, of glittering
armour. A sudden lightning flash from the clouds lit up the temple." These
are attested historical examples that demonstrate that Jesus' words were
fulfilled within a generation.
It seems, however, that some people are not convinced. For example,
Chuck Missler concocts an elaborate UFO-alien-demon scenario that he
claims must take place for Luke 21:11 to be fulfilled. Again, Jesus' words
are stretched beyond their intended meaning to avoid the obvious first-
century fulfillment.41
On December 31, 1979, Chuck Smith, the founding pastor of Calvary
Chapel, told those who had gathered on the last day of the year that the
"rapture" would take place before the end of 1981. He went on to say that
because of ozone depletion Revelation 16:8 would be fulfilled during the
tribulation period: "And the fourth angel poured out his bowl upon the sun;
and it was given to it to scorch men with fire." In addition, he told those in
attendance that Halley's Comet would pass near Earth in 1986 and would
wreak havoc on those left behind as debris from its million-mile-long tail
pummeled the planet.42 Here's how Smith explained the prophetic scenario
in his 1980 book Future Survival which is nearly identical to what appears
on the end-of-the-year taped message:

The Lord said that towards the end of the Tribulation period the sun
would scorch men who dwell upon the face of the earth (Rev. 16). The
year 1986 would fit just about right! We're getting close to the
Tribulation and the return of Christ in glory. All the pieces of the
puzzle are coming together.43

Contrary to Smith's far-fetched and inaccurate predictions, that first-century

generation was the generation that was close to the tribulation and the
coming of Jesus in judgment just like He predicted. The evidence? The
temple was destroyed just like He said it would be — not one stone was left
upon another (Matt 24:2). The issue of stellar phenomena will come up
again when we get to Matthew 24:29.

1. Darrell L. Bock, Luke: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New

Testament, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1996), 2:1666. For a
detailed study of the way the Greek word mello is used in the New
Testament and how it is variously translated, see Albert R. Pigeon, Things
that Were about to Occur: μέλλω (Norristown, PA: Unpublished
manuscript, 1997, 2006).
2. Craig A. Evans, "Mark 8:27-16:20," Word Biblical Commentary,
vol. 34B (Dallas: Word Books, 2001), 307. Quoted in H. Wayne House,
"Josephus and the Fall of Jerusalem: An Evaluation of the Preterist View on
Jerusalem in Prophecy, Pre-Trib Study Group" (December 8, 2008).
3. John L. Bray, Matthew 24 Fulfilled, 5th ed. (Powder Springs, GA:
American Vision Press, 2008), 26-27.
4. Histories, 1.2.
5. Adam Clarke, Commentary on the New Testament, 3 vols.
(Cincinnati: H. S. & J. Applegate & Co, 1851), 219.
6. Suetonius, Claudius, 18.2.
7. Tacitus, Annals, 12:43; cf. Dio Cassius, 9.11.
8. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 2.8. Cf. Orosius, History, 7.6.
9. "Josephus records that there was 'great famine' in the land during
which the price of food sky-rocketed and many died for lack of food
(Josephus, Antiquities, 3.320-321; 20.51, 101)."
10. David J. Palm, "The Signs of His Coming: An Examination of the
Olivet Discourse from a Preterist Perspective," Submitted to the Faculty at
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (June 1993), 83.
11. " [W]hile the famine pierced through her very bowels and marrow,
when also her passion was fired to a degree beyond the famine itself; nor
did she consult with anything but with her passion and the necessity she
was in. She then attempted a most unnatural thing; and snatching up her
son, who was a child sucking at her breast, she said, 'O thou miserable
infant! for whom shall I preserve thee in this war, this famine, and this
sedition? As to the war with the Romans, if they preserve our lives, we
must be slaves. This famine also will destroy us, even before that slavery
comes upon us. Yet are these seditious rogues more terrible than both the
other. Come on; be thou my food, and be thou a fury to these seditious
varlets, and a by-word to the world, which is all that is now wanting to
complete the calamities of us Jews.' As soon as she had said this, she slew
her son, and then roasted him, and ate the one half of him, and kept the
other half by her concealed. Upon this the seditious came in presently, and
smelling the horrid scent of this food, they threatened her that they would
cut her throat immediately if she did not show them what food she had
gotten ready. She replied that she had saved a very fine portion of it for
them, and withal uncovered what was left of her son. Hereupon they were
seized with a horror and amazement of mind, and stood astonished at the
sight, when she said to them, 'This is mine own son, and what hath been
done was mine own doing! Come, eat of this food; for I have eaten of it
myself! Do not you pretend to be either more tender than a woman, or more
compassionate than a mother; but if you be so scrupulous, and do
abominate this my sacrifice, as I have eaten the one half, let the rest be
reserved for me also.' After which those men went out trembling, being
never so much affrighted at anything as they were at this, and with some
difficulty they left the rest of that meat to the mother. Upon which the
whole city was full of this horrid action immediately; and while everybody
laid this miserable case before their own eyes, they trembled, as if this
unheard-of-action had been done by themselves. So those that were thus
distressed by the famine were very desirous to die, and those already dead
were esteemed happy, because they had not lived long enough either to hear
or to see such miseries." Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 6.3.4.
12. Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Old Testament, 4 vols. (New
York: T. Mason & G. Lane, 1837), 1:597.
13. James Jordan, The Law of the Covenant: An Exposition of Exodus
21-23 (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1984), 190-192:
https://goo.gl/OPLPKD
14. Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 4.5.5.
15. Carl Olof Jonsson and Wolfgang Herbst, The "Sign" of the Last
Days— When? (Atlanta, GA: Commentary Press, 1987), x. This book is
filled with statistical and historical information that easily refutes the notion
that our era is unique when it comes to earthquakes, wars, and famines.
16. Hal Lindsey, The 1980's: Countdown to Armageddon (King of
Prussia, PA: Westgate Press Inc., 1980), 30.
17. Hal Lindsey, Apocalypse Code (Palos Verdes, CA: Western Front
Ltd., 1997), 296.
18. Austin and Strauss published a less technical version of this paper
in 1999 under the title "Are Earthquakes Signs of the End Times?: A
Geological and Biblical Response to an Urban Legend," Christian Research
Journal, 21:4, 30-39.
19. Charles Richer, "Earthquakes," Natural History, 78:10 (December
1969), 44.
20. Seneca Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales, trans. Richard M.
Gummere, vol. 2 (London: 1920), 437. Quoted in Jonsson and Herbst, The
"Sign" of the Last Days, 75.
21. Jonsson and Herbst, The "Sign" of the Last Days — When?, 78.
22. George Edmundson, The Church in Rome in the First Century
(London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1913), 143.
23. Simon Winchester, Krakatoa: The Day the World Exploded (New
York: Harper-Collins, 2003).
24. Harumi Ozawa, "Japan's ancient tsunami warnings carved in
stone" (May 8, 2011): http://bit.ly/1gZ3RHP
25. B.J. Oropeza, 99 Reasons why No One Knows When Christ Will
Return (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 73.
26. Milton S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, [1883] n.d.), 445.
27. James Jordan, Through New Eyes: Developing a Biblical View of
the World (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishing, [1988] 1999), 96.
28. Jamie Frater, "Top 10 Worst Plagues in History," Listverse
(January 18, 2009): https://goo.gl/j8uytC Also, see George C. Kohn,
Encyclopedia of Plague and Pestilence (New York: Facts on File, Inc,
1995) and Kenneth F. Kiple, Plague, Pox and Pestilence: Diseases in
History (New York: Barnes & Noble Books, 1997).
29. F.W. Farrar, The Gospel According to St. Luke, Cambridge Bible
for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge: At the University Press, [1880]
1910), 316.
30. C. Suetonius Tranquillus, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars: Nero,
39.
31. Tacitus, Annals, 16.13.
32. Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 6.1.1.
33. Nigel Calder, The Comet is Coming!: The Feverish Legacy of Mr.
Halley (London: British Broadcasting Corporation, 1980), 12.
 34. Edwin Emerson, Comet Lore: Halley's Comet in History and
Astronomy (New York: The Shilling Press, 1910), 87-88. Also, Amedee
Guillemin, The World of Comets, trans. James Glaisher (London: Sampson
Low, Marston, & Rivington, 1877), 14.
35. Calder, The Comet is Coming!, 12.
36. Jean-Pierre Verdet, The Sky: Mystery, Magic, and Myth (Harry N.
Abrams, Inc., [1987] 1992), 78.
37. Calder, The Comet is Coming!, 13.
38. (New York: Walker and Company, 1985), 6.
39. Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, 6:5:1-3.
40. Darrell L. Bock, Luke: 9:51-24:53 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Books, 1996), 1667.
41. Chuck Missler, "Signs in the Sun, Moon and Stars," Foreshadows
of Wrath and Redemption, 99-113.
42. Halley's Comet also appeared in A.D. 66 and passed over
Jerusalem, four years before the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem by
the Romans. Could this have been the fulfillment of Luke 21:11?
43. Chuck Smith, Future Survival (Costa Mesa, CA: The Word for
Today, [1978] 1980), 21.
 FOUR

Betrayal, False Prophets, Lawlessness,

Gospel Preached in the Whole World

MATTHEW 24:9
"THEN THEY WILL DELIVER YOU TO TRIBULATION,
AND WILL KILL YOU, AND YOU WILL BE
HATED BY ALL NATIONS BECAUSE OF MY NAME."

Jesus continued His warnings to His disciples by telling them that their
generation would experience tribulation, a falling away from the faith,
betrayal, false prophets, and increased lawlessness. Once again, Jesus
clearly identified His audience: "Then they will deliver you to tribulation,
and will kill you, and you will be hated." Does anyone believe that those in
Jesus' audience would have thought that He did not have them in view? If
Jesus had a distant future audience in mind, then what pronoun could Jesus
have used to ensure that those in His present audience knew that He was
addressing them, if "you" did mean them?
No one can doubt that tribulation followed the church soon after
Pentecost (Acts 2). From its inception, the church underwent relentless
tribulation by Jewish religious and civil officials and later by the Romans
under Nero who reigned from AD 54 until his suicide in 68. Peter and John
were arrested and put in jail (4:3). They were warned not to speak to any
man in the name of Jesus (4:17). They were "flogged" after their second
arrest (5:40). The tribulation worsened with the death of Stephen (7:54-60).
A "great tribulation began against the church in Jerusalem," and the Jewish
Christian converts "were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and
Samaria, except the apostles" (Acts 8:1-3). The Greek word often translated
"affliction" or "persecution" (e.g., Acts 11:19) is the same word translated
"tribulation" (thlipsis) in Matthew 24:9. This was the beginning of a greater
tribulation to come.

The success that these antagonists of Stephen score and the eagerness
to achieve the same in the case of Paul is indicative of a sharpening of
the situation. Making offensive speeches against the temple (τόπος
[place]) and the law (νόμος) is the accusation which they level against
Stephen (6:13)….
It is, however, not the only martyrdom. References to persecution
and even murder are made again and again. Paul accuses himself of
having put Christians to death (22:4; cf. 9:1). The execution of James
carried out by Herod Antipas (12:2) is only part of an attempt to please
the Jews...The Jews of the Diaspora are described as having incited
(13:50) people against the Christians, instigated persecution by sinister
means (17:5) and actually themselves carried out harassment (14:2).
They are characterized as having been propelled by zeal (an indicative
term!) in this activity (13:45; 17:5). Their machinations are a standing
feature on the journeys of Paul….
A number of actions are indicated in Acts: searching of houses
(8:3), ύποβάλλειν [suborning] of witnesses (6:11), flogging (22:19),
taking into custody (8:3; 22:19), fettering (9:21; 22:4), forced
renunciation of the faith (26:11), tormenting (26:11), stoning by
witnesses (7:58f.), application of lynch justice (9:1 φόνος [murder]),
and the public display of agreement with such measures (Acts 8:1
συνευδοκεῖν [consenting]), which is equally or possibly even more
abhorrent than the rash action of a persecutor.1

Throughout the New Testament, we see that Jesus' disciples were delivered
up to tribulation, and some were killed (Matt. 24:9). The apostle John wrote
that he was a "fellow partaker in the tribulation" (Rev. 1:9). Paul described
the tribulation endured by Christians in Thessalonica: "We ourselves speak
proudly of you among the churches of God for your perseverance and faith
in the midst of all your persecutions and afflictions [lit., tribulations] which
you endure" (2 Thess. 1:4). The "persecutions and afflictions" directed at
the church brought on God's righteous judgment (1:5). God would "repay
with affliction those who afflict you" (1:6). The "you" were the
Thessalonians (Acts 17:1-15). Paul is not describing some distant future
tribulation.
In Mark's account of the Olivet Discourse, we learn that the disciples
would be delivered "to the courts," "flogged in the synagogues," and made
to "stand before governors and kings" (13:9). Jesus used similar words in
Matthew 10:17-18 when He sent the Twelve out as witnesses to the nation
of Israel: "Beware of men; for they will deliver you up to the courts, and
scourge you in their synagogues; and you shall even be brought before
kings for My sake, as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles." The
existence of religious and political tribunals is indicative of what life was
like in first-century Judea for Christians. Later, John would write, "Do not
marvel, brethren, if the world hates you" (1 John 3:13). Jesus had warned
His disciples, "If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before
it hated you" (John 15:18).
As we've seen, the book of Acts records the fulfillment of Jesus'
prediction of religious and political tribulation in the period before the
destruction of Jerusalem. It was severe enough that believers living in
Jerusalem were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. Men and women
were dragged from their homes and put in prison (Acts 8:1, 3; 9:1-2; 13:45,
50; 14:2, 4, 5; 1 Thess. 2:14-16). Some were even put to death (Acts 26:10).
Saul had "punished" Christians in their synagogues and attempted to force
them to blaspheme the Lord (26:11; 22:19). Herod joined in the persecution
by arresting Peter "because he saw that it pleased the Jews" (12:3-5),
eventually leading to the murder of James (12:2). Paul summarizes the
tribulation he endured after his conversion:

Five times I received from the Jews thirty-nine lashes. Three times I
was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was
shipwrecked, a night and a day I have spent in the deep. I have been on
frequent journeys, in dangers from rivers, dangers from robbers,
dangers from my countrymen, dangers from the Gentiles, dangers in
the city, dangers in the wilderness, dangers on the sea, dangers among
false brethren; I have been in labor and hardship, through many
sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, often without food, in cold and
exposure (2 Cor. 11:24-27).

A group of Jews under oath conspired to assassinate Paul, and would not
give up until they accomplished their task.

[T]he Jews formed a conspiracy and bound themselves under an oath,

 saying that they would neither eat nor drink until they had killed Paul.
There were more than forty who formed this plot. They came to the
chief priests and the elders and said, "We have bound ourselves under
a solemn oath to taste nothing until we have killed Paul. Now
therefore, you and the Council notify the commander to bring him
down to you, as though you were going to determine his case by a
more thorough investigation; and we for our part are ready to slay him
before he comes near the place" (Acts 23:12-15, 21).

Peter describes a "fiery ordeal among you, which comes upon you for your
testing" (1 Pet. 4:12). He warned of an impending trial that would most
likely affect them, not some distant group of Christians, even though future
generations of Christians would also endure tribulation. As history attests,
Peter himself was caught up in the fiery ordeal, as Geoffrey W Bromiley
writes:

A drastic change came in July of A.D., 64, when Nero accused of

setting a disastrous fire in Rome and unable to clear himself by gifts or
sacrifices, decided to make the Christians scapegoats, and started a
persecution which for its cruelty would evoke censure even from those
who regarded Christianity as a debased superstition (Tacitus Ann. xv.
44). References to this persecution may perhaps be found in 1 Peter,
and also in 2 Timothy, in which Paul mentions his trial and impending
death.2

Clement of Rome wrote of Peter and Paul: "Through jealousy and envy the
greatest and most just pillars of the Church were persecuted, and came even
unto death."3 Jesus predicted such a persecution of Peter in the last chapter
of John's gospel:

Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to gird
yourself and walk wherever you wished; but when you grow old, you
will stretch out your hands and someone else will gird you, and bring
you where you do not wish to go. Now this He said, signifying by
what kind of death he would glorify God (John 21:18-19).

The church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 263-339) commented:

It is, therefore, recorded that Paul was beheaded in Rome itself, and
 that Peter likewise was crucified under Nero. This account of Peter and
Paul is substantiated by the fact that their names are preserved in the
cemeteries of that place even to the present day. And that they both
suffered martyrdom at the same time is stated by Dionysius, bishop of
Corinth, in his epistle to the Romans, in the following words: 'You
have thus by such an admonition bound together the planting of Peter
and of Paul at Rome and Corinth. For both of them planted and
likewise taught us in our Corinth. And they taught together in like
manner in Italy, and suffered martyrdom at the same time.' I have
quoted these things in order that the truth of the history might be still
more confirmed.4

We will further examine the subject of the tribulation with the study of
Matthew 24:21.

MATTHEW 24:10
"AT THAT TIME MANY WILL FALL AWAY
AND WILL BETRAY ONE ANOTHER
AND HATE ONE ANOTHER."

There is no doubt that the first-century church had to contend with betrayal
and apostasy from within, as Jesus had said (Matt. 24:10). Luke adds, "But
you will be betrayed even by parents and brothers and relatives and friends,
and they will put some of you to death" (Luke 21:16). Notice that Luke says
"you will be betrayed." The Old Testament offered a similar warning
(Micah 7:6) that was repeated by Jesus (Matt. 10:21, 35-36; Luke 12:53).
Paul stated, "All who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are
Phygellus and Hermogenes" (2 Tim. 1:15). Demas, who was said to have
"loved this present world," deserted Paul (2 Tim. 4:10). There were others:
"At my first defense no one supported me, but all deserted me; may it not
be counted against them" (2 Tim. 4:16).
There were also Judaizers who constantly distorted Jesus' message by
preaching doctrines that opposed "the gospel of Christ" (Gal. 1:6-10). The
church at Ephesus was warned that "savage wolves will come in among
you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will
arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them"
(Acts 20:29-30).
 MATTHEW 24:11
"MANY FALSE PROPHETS WILL ARISE, AND WILL
MISLEAD MANY."

Jesus' warning against false prophets proved true. The apostle John wrote
that "many false prophets have gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1). He
also wrote that "many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who
do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver
and the antichrist" (2 John 7). In his first epistle, John told his readers that it
was "the last hour," and just as they had "heard that antichrist is coming,
even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the
last hour" (1 John 2:18). John indicated that the deceivers rose up in the
midst of the church in his day: "They went out from us, but they were not
really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us;
but they went out, in order that they might be shown that they all are not of
us" (2:19).
Paul described the Judaizing teachers as "false apostles, deceitful
workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ" (2 Cor. 11:13). He
instructed Timothy to stop "certain men" from teaching "strange doctrines"
(1 Tim. 1:3-4, 18-20; 6:3-5, 20-21). The problem of false teachers was
common enough that Peter could write:

But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also
be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive
heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift
destruction upon themselves. Many will follow their sensuality, and
because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; and in their
greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long
ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep (2 Pet. 2:1-3; cf. 3:1-
9).

Paul, writing about his own generation, said, "But the Spirit explicitly says
that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to
deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of liars
seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, men who forbid
marriage and advocate abstaining from foods which God has created to be
gratefully shared in by those who believe and know the truth" (1 Tim. 4:1-
3; cf. 2 Tim. 3:1-9).
 Paul mentions those who are "disturbing" the Galatian Christians who
"want to distort the gospel of Christ" (Gal 1:7). In the next chapter, Paul
calls out the "false brethren" who were spying out their "liberty ... in order
to bring [them] into bondage" (Gal. 2:4; also Phil. 1:15). Paul wrote the
following to Titus:

For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers,
especially those of the circumcision, who must be silenced because
they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not
teach for the sake of sordid gain (Titus 1:10-11).

John describes "evil men ... who call themselves apostles, and they are not"
(Rev. 2:2). These passages give us solid scriptural evidence that the words
of Jesus were fulfilled in the days leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem
and the end of the age that closed the old covenant era.

MATTHEW 24:12
"BECAUSE LAWLESSNESS IS INCREASED,
MOST PEOPLE'S LOVE WILL GROW COLD."

The last warning Jesus gave in Matthew 24:9-12 was that there would be
increased lawlessness. Jesus indicted the religious leaders of His day
because they were lawless while claiming the covering of their religious
offices and special status as leaders in Israel:

Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to His disciples, saying: "The
scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of
Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do
according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them... So
you, too, outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full
of hypocrisy and lawlessness" (Matt. 23:1-3, 28).

They neglected the commandments of God and substituted "the tradition of

men." As a result, they became "experts at setting aside the commandment
of God in order to keep" their man-made traditions (Mark 7:8-9).
The New Testament writers repeatedly addressed the sensual living that
was prevalent in their time. Their worldliness destroyed relationships within
the church and tore down the body of Christ. Paul was shocked at the
behavior of some in the Corinthian church:
 It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and
immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles,
that someone has his father's wife. And you have become arrogant, and
have not mourned instead, in order that the one who had done this
deed might be removed from your midst (1 Cor. 5:1-2).

In the following chapter, Paul deals with disputes that were going on in the
church: "Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits
with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be
defrauded? On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this
even to your brethren" (6:7-8).
We often think that our day is the epitome of lawlessness because of
homosexuality. Paul was dealing with this sin in his day (Rom. 1:18-32; 1
Cor. 6:9-11; 1 Tim. 1:10). Slavery ("kidnapping" or "man stealing") was
also widespread and condemned by the early church (1 Tim. 1:10; Rev.
18:13).
Some of the churches in Asia Minor were called out by Jesus for their
toleration of immorality and were told to "repent" or judgment would come
(Rev. 2:5, 16, 22; 3:3, 19). Notice how Jesus threatens these local churches:
"I am coming to you" (2:5), "I am coming to you quickly" (2:16), "I will
come like a thief" (3:3). These comings are not describing a distant future
personal physical coming of Jesus. They are judgment comings reminiscent
of the judgment comings found in the Old Testament.
The above passages only describe what was happening within the limited
confines of the Christian world that we can glean from Scripture. The larger
world had its share of lawlessness. The life and exploits of Nero are well-
known as described in the September 2014 issue of National Geographic:

One is hard pressed to "rehabilitate" a man who, according to

historical accounts, ordered his first wife, Octavia, killed; kicked his
second wife, Poppaea, to death when she was pregnant; saw to the
murder of his mother, Agrippina the Younger (possibly after sleeping
with her); perhaps also murdered his stepbrother, Britannicus;
instructed his mentor Seneca to commit suicide (which he solemnly
did); castrated and then married a teenage boy; presided over the
wholesale arson of Rome in A.D. 64 and then shifted the blame to a
host of Christians (including Saints Peter and Paul), who were rounded
up and beheaded or crucified and set aflame so as to illuminate an
imperial festival.
Nearly every secular author of the era had something to say about Nero's
immorality and lawlessness. "Roman historian Tacitus (A.D. 55-117) spoke
of Nero's 'cruel nature' that 'put to death so many innocent men.' Roman
naturalist Pliny the Elder (A.D. 23-79) described Nero as 'the destroyer of
the human race' and 'the poison of the world.' Roman satirist Juvenal (A.D.
60-140) lamented 'Nero's cruel and bloody tyranny.' Elsewhere he called
Nero a 'cruel tyrant.'"5

MATTHEW 24:13
"BUT THE ONE WHO ENDURES TO THE
END, HE SHALL BE SAVED."

Here Jesus offered His disciples comfort. He told them that all those who
endured the great social, religious, and political upheaval would be saved
— that is, they would not die in Rome's war with the Jews. "The end" is not
a reference to the end of the world. The particular "end" mentioned by Jesus
is completed before "this generation" passed away, that is, the generation to
whom Jesus was speaking.
Using "the end" in terms of the subject under discussion at the time is
common to the Bible and in our everyday speech. When God was about to
judge the land of Israel through the agency of Babylon, Ezekiel recorded
God's words concerning the impending judgment:

"An end! The end is coming on the four corners of the land. Now the
end is upon you, and I shall send My anger against you; I shall judge
you according to your ways, and I shall bring all your abominations
upon you. An end is coming; the end has come! It has awakened
against you; behold, it has come!" (Ezek. 7:2-3, 6; Amos 8:2, 10).

Understanding the meaning of "end" begins by understanding the timing

and context. Not every use of "end" is a distant eschatological end. "The
three uses of the key word end [in Ezek. 7:2-3] stresses that the fulfillment
of the prophecy was at hand. The four corners of the land suggests that all
the people of Judah would be affected, not just those in Jerusalem,"6 but not
the whole world. The end that Ezekiel is prophesying relates to the
overthrow of the kingdom of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar "on the four
corners of the land" of Israel. The devastation that was to come is outlined
in detail in Ezekiel 6: "Alas, because of all the evil abominations of the
house of Israel, which will fall by sword, famine and plague!" (vv. 11-12) is
reminiscent of what we find in the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24:7; Luke
21:11, 24).
"The end" described in the Olivet Discourse, therefore, is a reference to
the destruction of the temple, since that was the question asked by the
disciples and answered by Jesus (Matt. 24:1-3), related to the end of their
generation (24:34). In Matthew 24:3, Jesus made it clear that the end was
the "end of the age," a time that Paul said had come upon the people of his
day (1 Cor. 10:11; also Heb. 1:1-2; 9:26; 1 Pet. 1:20; 4:7).
Earlier in Matthew's Gospel, Jesus presents a similar future scenario that
He applied directly to His disciples: "And you will be hated by all on
account of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will
be saved. But whenever they persecute you in this city, flee to the next; for
truly I say to you, you shall not finish going through the cities of Israel,
until the Son of Man comes" (10:22-23). It's obvious that Jesus is not
describing a world-wide event since only the cities of Israel are in view.
"The end" in 10:22 has the same meaning as "the end" in 24:13,
"persevering for as long as may be necessary.... In the face of persecution
and possible martyrdom the disciples must remain true to their loyalty to
Jesus; if they do so 'to the end,' they will be 'saved,' even though they may
be executed."7 In neither case is the end of the world in view ... only the end
of the age related to Old Covenant practices and redemptive rituals.

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 WILL COME."

Many who read Matthew 24:14 conclude that there is no way the gospel
could have been preached in the whole world before the destruction of the
temple in AD 70. Our first commitment is to what the Bible says by letting
its words explain what Jesus really meant. Remember Matthew 24:34:
"This generation will not pass away until all these things take place." One
of the "all these things" is the gospel being "preached in the whole world ...
to all the nations."
The word translated "world" in Matthew 24:14 is the Greek word
oikoumenē rather than the more common word for "world" kosmos. This is
the only time Matthew uses oikoumenē. It is best translated as "inhabited
earth," "known world," or "political boundary" (my preferred rendering)
and is sometimes translated as "Roman Empire" (e.g., Acts 11:28; 17:6),
which is more of an interpretation than a translation. The same Greek word
is used in Luke 2:1: "Now in those days a decree went out from Caesar
Augustus, that a census be taken of all the inhabited earth" [oikoumenē].
Rome could only take a census of its subjects, those who lived within the
political boundaries of the empire. This more accurate translation helps us
understand that Jesus was saying the gospel of the kingdom (Acts 28:23,
31) would be preached throughout the Roman Empire (the known world)
before judgment would be poured out on Jerusalem.
The reaction of the Jews to the preaching of the gospel by Paul in "a
synagogue of the Jews" in Thessalonica led to violence and had an impact
on "the world":

[T]he Jews, becoming jealous and taking along some wicked men
from the market place, formed a mob and set the city in an uproar; and
attacking the house of Jason, they were seeking to bring them out to
the people. When they did not find them, they began dragging Jason
and some brethren before the city authorities, shouting, "These men
who have upset the world have come here also; and Jason has
welcomed them, and they all act contrary to the decrees of Caesar,
saying that there is another king, Jesus" (Acts 17:5-7).

The Greek word translated "world" is oikoumenē. The New American

Standard translation notes in the margin that it's literally "inhabited earth"
and references Matthew 24:14, where it's translated "world" and Luke 2:1
where it's translated "inhabited earth." It's unfortunate that while many
modern translations translate oikoumenē in Luke 2:1 as "inhabited earth,"
some still translate oikoumenē in Matthew 24:14 as "world." The following
explanation found in Appendix 129 of The Companion Bible offers a clear
definition of oikoumenē as compared to kosmos: "[Oikoumenē] is used of
the habitable world, as distinct from the kosmos.... Hence, it is used in a
more limited and special sense of the Roman Empire, which was then
dominant. See Luke 2.1; 4.5; 21.26."8
It's odd that the English Standard Version (ESV), which is promoted as
"an 'essentially literal' translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the
precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible
writer," translates oikoumenē as "world." The translation philosophy of the
ESV states, "As an essentially literal translation, then, the ESV seeks to
carry over every possible nuance of meaning in the original words of
Scripture into our own language." Unfortunately, the ESV does not follow
its own translation methodology when it comes to translating the Greek
word oikoumenē that has its own "nuance" of a limited geographical area.
The ESV consistently translates oikoumenē as "world" (Matt. 24:14; Luke
2:1; Acts 11:28; Rev. 3:10). The unsuspecting reader of the ESV might
never know that the general Greek word for "world" (kosmos) is not used.
In dealing with a biblical skeptic, the Christian reader of the ESV will have
to explain how the Romans could have taxed "all the world" (Luke 2:1) and
why there is no historical record of a famine over the "whole wide world"
in the first century (Acts 11:28).
When ministers preach on Luke 2:1, they must explain that "world"
refers to "the world of Jesus' day" or the "known world." But this would be
unnecessary if oikoumenē had been translated "literally." The New
American Standard Bible is also inconsistent. In Matthew 24:14, oikoumenē
is translated "world," but in Luke 2:1, it's translated as "inhabited earth,"
and in a marginal note adds that it refers to "the Roman empire." When we
get to Acts 11:28, the NASB goes back to "world" as a translation of
oikoumenē and adds in a marginal note that it literally means "inhabited
earth." If it "literally" means "inhabited earth," then why not translate it that
way?
Paul wrote that the gospel "has come to you," the Colossian Christians,
"just as in all the world"9 (Col. 1:5-6), that is, those living in other parts of
the empire (also see Rom. 15:24, 28). Interestingly, Paul uses the Greek
word kosmos, so even if Jesus had used kosmos in Matthew 24:14,
Colossians 1:6 would be evidence that Jesus' words were being fulfilled.
The same is true for Romans 1:8: "First, I thank my God through Jesus
Christ for you all, because your faith is being proclaimed throughout the
whole world [kosmos]," that is, the world of Paul's day.
The Bible often uses "world" (kosmos) similar to the way we use it. Paul
goes so far as to state that the gospel "was proclaimed in all creation under
heaven" (Col. 1:23). Norman L. Geisler offers the following commentary
on Colossians 1:23:

to every creature under heaven. This is obviously a figure of speech

indicating the universality of the gospel and its proclamation, not that
every person on the globe heard Paul preach. In Acts 2:5 this phrase
describes countries without including, for example, anyone from North
 or South America (cf. Also Gen. 41:57;10 1 Kings 10:24;11 Rom.
1:812).13

There are also examples from the Old Testament of using world-wide
language for local events (e.g., Zeph. 1:1-6; Nahum 1:2-6; Micah 1:3-4).

Nahum states that "the earth and all who live in it" tremble when the
Lord comes in judgment (1:5), and yet the oracle is very specifically
confined to Nineveh (cf. 1:1, 8, 11, 14). And Micah calls all the
nations of the earth to account (1:2), even though God's vengeance is
relegated in this instance to Judea and Samaria (1:5-6).14

Paul quotes Psalm 19:4 to confirm that the gospel had gone worldwide:
"But I say, surely they have never heard, have they? Indeed they have; their
voice has gone out into all the earth [or land], and their words to the ends
of the world [oikoumenē]"" (Rom. 10:18; also 2 Tim. 4:17; 1 Thess. 1:8).
Even the use of "all the nations" is confirmed by Paul when he declared
that the gospel had "been made known to all the nations" (Rom. 16:26), a
direct fulfillment of Matthew 24:14. Notice the verb tense — "having been
made known."15 In 1 Timothy 3:16, we read: "By common confession,
great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, was
vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations,
believed on in the world [kosmos], taken up in glory."16All the
requirements of a pre-AD 70 fulfillment are met when we let the Bible
interpret itself. "All nations" is not always a reference to every nation in the
entire world (e.g., 1 Chron. 14:17; Ezra 1:1; Ps. 118:10; Jer. 27:7; Acts 2:5).
Preaching the gospel to the then-known world is different from the Great
Commission since it requires making disciples of the nations. Disciple-
making is a much broader and comprehensive task (Matt. 28:1820). Jesus
assures His disciples that He is with them "always" (lit., "all the days"),
even during the tribulation period that takes place as the end of the age
passes away with the destruction of the of the temple. The horrible period
of tribulation that was prophesied was not a time to lose heart or hope.

1. Ernst Bammel, "Jewish Activity against Christians in Palestine

According to Acts," in The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting: The
Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, eds. Richard Bauckham and Bruce
W. Winter (Grand Rapids, MI and Carlisle, Cumbria: Eerdmans/Paternoster
Press, 1995), 4:358-360.
 2. Geoffrey W. Bromily, "Persecute; Persecution," The International
Standard Bible Encyclopedia, gen. ed. G. W. Bromily (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1986), 3:772.
3. 1 Clement 5:2.
4. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, trans. Christian Frederick Cruse
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1958), Book 2, chap. 25.
5. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Beast of Revelation (Powder Springs,
GA: American Vision Press, 2002), 52.
6. Earl D. Radmacher, gen. ed., The Nelson Study Bible (Nashville:
Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997), 1342, note on 7:2-3.
7. R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, The New International
Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007),
394, 395.
8. E.W. Bullinger, ed., The Companion Bible (Grand Rapids, MI:
Kregel Publications, 1990), appendix 129, 162. For a comprehensive study
of the Greek word oikoumenē and its use in the New Testament, see Gary
DeMar, 10 Popular Prophecy Myths Exposed and Answered (Powder
Springs, GA: American Vision, 2010), chap. 8.
9. On how the word "world" is used in everyday contemporary speech,
see Gary DeMar, Myths, Lies, and Half-Truths: How Misreading the Bible
Neutralizes Christians (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2004),
chap. 1.
10. "The people from all the earth came to Egypt to buy grain from
Joseph" (Gen. 41:57).
11. "And the earth was seeking the presence of Solomon..." (1 Kings
10:24).
12. "Your faith has been proclaimed throughout the whole world"
(Rom. 1:8). "For the Romans [Paul] rejoiced that news of their faith had
spread all over the world, a hyperbole meaning throughout the Roman
Empire." John A. Witner, "Romans," The Bible Knowledge Commentary:
New Testament (An Exposition of the Scriptures by Dallas Seminary
Faculty), John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, eds. (Wheaton, IL: Victor
Books, 1983), 440.
13. Norman Geisler, "Colossians," The Bible Knowledge Commentary,
675.
14. David J. Palm, "The Signs of His Coming: An Examination of the
Olivet Discourse from a Preterist Perspective," Submitted to the Faculty at
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (June 1993), 58.
15. Aorist (action finished in the past) passive participle.
16. For a comprehensive study of Matthew 24:14 and related passages,
see Gary DeMar, "The Myth that the Gospel Has Yet to be Preached in the
'Whole World,'" 10 Popular Prophecy Myths Exposed and Answered
(Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 2010), chap. 8.
 FIVE

Abomination of Desolation, Fleeing to the

Mountains, Leaving it All Behind

MATTHEW 24:15-16
"THEREFORE WHEN YOU SEE THE
ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION WHICH WAS
SPOKEN OF THROUGH DANIEL THE PROPHET,
STANDING IN THE HOLY PLACE (LET THE
READER UNDERSTAND), THEN THOSE WHO ARE
IN JUDEA MUST FLEE TO THE MOUNTAINS."

There is Old Covenant language about "desolation" related to judgment that

Jesus' disciples would have recognized. Recall that Jesus prophesied what
was going to happen to the temple or "house" in Jerusalem: "O Jerusalem,
Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to
it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers
her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is
left to you desolate" (Matt. 23:37-38).
Consider the following from a description of the desolation that came
upon the temple that Solomon had built and was later destroyed by
Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 1:1-2; Jer. 52:12-13):

Your holy cities have become a wilderness;

Zion has become a wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation.
Our holy and beautiful house,
Where our fathers praised You,
 Has been burned by fire:
And all our precious things have become a ruin
(Isa. 64:10-11).

The temple was not destroyed and desolate because of what

Nebuchadnezzar had done. Nebuchadnezzar was God's instrument of
judgment because of what the people of Zion had done. Notice the use of
the second person plural used by Jesus: "When you see." Why would the
use of "you" in verse 15 be different from the "you" in verse 9? "Then they
will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you will be hated by
all nations on account of My name." Compare to what Jesus said in a
different context:

"For the days will come upon you when your enemies will throw up a
barricade against you, and surround you and hem you in on every side,
and they will level you to the ground and your children within you,
and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did
not recognize the time of your visitation" (Luke 19:43-44).

A comment in Tim LaHaye's Prophecy Study Bible claims that the use of
"you" in Matthew 24:15 "must be taken generically as 'you of the Jewish
nation.'"1 There is no evidence offered by the editors to substantiate this
shift in audience reference from the disciples to Jews living at a time far
removed from Jesus' day. If Jesus had wanted to refer to a different
audience, He could have said, "When they see the abomination of
desolation which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the
holy place (let the reader understand)." But even if the "you" in 24:15 does
refer to the "you of the Jewish nation," the reference is to the Jews of that
first-century generation since the Jewish people were in their land and the
temple was still standing and was not fully restored until AD 63, seven
years before its predicted destruction.
By comparing this passage with the parallel passage in Luke 21:2021, we
can pinpoint the time when the abomination of desolation was to appear:
"When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her
desolation is at hand. Then those who are in Judea must flee to the
mountains." Was Jerusalem ever surrounded by armies prior to AD 70?
Yes! Did Christian Jews flee the city? Yes! Notice that Jesus said, "When
you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies." Any time after this occurrence
would have been too late for those living in Jerusalem. Notice the specifics
of Luke's version: "those who are in Judea must flee ... and those who are in
the country must not enter the city."
The series of events were local and visible to those living in the outskirts
of the center of the city. But how could anyone escape after Jerusalem was
surrounded? For those in the city, they could not. D. A. Carson notes that
"there is reasonably good tradition that Christians abandoned the city,
perhaps in A.D. 68, about halfway through the siege."2 Any later and it
would have been nearly impossible to escape since "once the Zealots had
gained control of the city, they slashed the throats of any whom they even
suspected of trying to escape."3
There had been a small window of opportunity open to those living in the
city. Josephus mentions "that early in the conflict the Roman general
Cestius attempted to lay siege to the city. But, having suffered what was to
all appearances a relatively minor defeat, he mysteriously pulled his forces
back and gave up the siege." After an "aborted attempt to breach the walls
of the city, 'many distinguished Jews abandoned the city as swimmers
desert a sinking ship.' But shortly after Cestius' defeat, the Romans rallied
and the city was surrounded a second time." At this stage of the siege, "the
inhabitants of the city were truly hemmed in on all sides and few escaped
the city alive after that."4

Part of the cause of the magnitude of the tragedy surrounding

Jerusalem's death lay in the fact that, shortly before the final siege-
works closed the city, "on the feast of unleavened bread, which was
not come … Eleazar and his party opened the gates of this … temple,
and admitted such of the people as were desirous to worship God into
it" (Wars, V,3,1). Vast multitudes of Jews and proselytes poured into
Jerusalem despite the war-time conditions, to worship at the Passover
(Wars, VI,9,3). Confident of God's protection, they crowded into what,
ironically, would prove to be their grave, sealed in by their own people
(Wars, V,1,5). Jesus ordered His people, "'Flee!" (See also Eusebius,
Ecclesiastical History, 111,5.)5

Fleeing to the mountains outside the city indicates that the judgment was
local and not worldwide. If the judgment had been global, there wouldn't
have been any place to flee. Those escaping could do so on foot. There are
biblical examples of similar escapes to the mountains as places of refuge to
avoid being caught up in the catastrophe of judgment. Lot and his family
had been warned by the angels, "escape to the mountains, or you will be
swept away" (Gen. 19:17; see 14:10). Jesus warned those of His generation,
"Remember Lot's wife" (Luke 17:32).
There's a similar mountain escape in the book of Joshua. Rahab tells the
two spies, "Go to the hill country, so that the pursuers will not happen upon
you, and hide yourselves there for three days until the pursuers return. Then
afterward you may go on your way" (2:16). Once again, a local event.
When Midian was at war with Israel, "the sons of Israel made for
themselves the dens which were in the mountains and the caves and the
strongholds" (Judges 6:2). There's this:

Noah's exodus from the old evil world to a new world landed his ark
on mountains. When Jacob fled from Laban, he went to the mountains
of Gilead (Genesis 31:21-54). When the spies fled from cursed
Jericho, they went to the mountains (Joshua 2:16, 22). Elijah fled from
Jezebel to the Mountain of God... Thus, Jesus' admonition to flee to the
mountains stands right in line with the typological pattern of going to a
mountain after making an exodus.6

The Abomination that Results in Desolation

The Roman armies are not the abomination that causes desolation. While
this has been a popular view with Bible commentators, it does not fit the
theological context. Why would God use the Roman armies to bring
judgment on Jerusalem by destroying the temple for something the Romans
did? It makes no sense.
An abomination in the Old Testament was anything that desecrated the
true worship of God: Aaron and the golden calf (Ex. 32); the strange fire
offered by Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10:1); Eli's evil two sons, Hophni and
Phinehas (1 Sam. 2-4); and the desolating sacrilege that resulted in God's
departure from Solomon's temple (Ezek. 8-11). God sent Judah into
captivity under the Babylonians and destroyed the temple because of her
"abominations" (5:9). God's sanctuary had been defiled with "detestable
idols and ... abominations" (5:11) that were the result of Israel's actions.
While we know when the abomination that causes desolation took place,
there are at least three theories as to what it was.

The Jewish Zealots

The first theory points to Jewish Zealots who advocated the overthrow of
the Roman government by force: "The zealots had got possession of the
Temple at an early stage in the siege and ... made the Holy Place (in the
very words of the historian [Josephus]) 'a garrison and stronghold' of their
tyrannous and lawless rule; while the better priests looked on from afar and
wept tears of horror."7
At the outbreak of the Jewish war with Rome, the Zealots occupied the
temple area. They allowed criminals, even some murderers, to roam about
freely in the Holy of Holies. In the winter of 67-68, they placed a non-
Levite as high priest.8 "It was in response to this specific action that the
retired priest Ananus, with tears, lamented: 'It would have been far better
for me to have died before I had seen the house of God laden with such
abominations and its unapproachable and hallowed places crowded with the
feet of murderers' (Wars, 4:3:10)."9
The Zealots "went over all the buildings, and the temple itself, and fell
upon the priests, and those that were about the sacred offices."10 Josephus
continues with his description of the bloody nightmare:

[F]or those darts that were thrown by the engines [of war] came with
that force, that they went over all the buildings, and reached as far as
the altar, and the temple itself, and fell upon the priests, and those that
were about the sacred offices; insomuch that many persons who came
thither with great zeal from the ends of the earth, to offer sacrifices at
this celebrated place, which was esteemed holy by all mankind, fell
down before their own sacrifices themselves, and sprinkled that altar
which was venerable among all men, both Greeks and Barbarians, with
their own blood; till the dead bodies of strangers were mingled
together with those of their own country, and those of profane persons
with those of the priests, and the blood of all sorts of dead carcasses
stood in lakes in the holy courts themselves. And now, "O most
wretched city, what misery so great as this didst thou suffer from the
Romans, when they came to purify thee from thy intense hatred! For
thou couldst be no longer a place fit for God, nor couldst thou long
continue in being, after thou hadst been a sepulcher for the bodies of
thy own people, and hadst made the holy house itself a burying-place
in this civil war of thine. Yet mayst thou again grow better, if
perchance thou wilt hereafter appease the anger of that God who is the
author of thy destruction."
 But I must restrain myself from these passions by the rules of
history, since this is not a proper time for domestical lamentations, but
for historical narrations; I therefore return to the operations that follow
in this sedition.11

The Zealots believed God would intervene directly to vindicate their cause
against Rome. The Zealots hoped "God would send them his supernatural
help as he had done when they had been led by Moses and Joshua."12 As
history attests, that did not happen. In fact, God warned that it would not
happen (Matt. 24:23-26). God's purpose was judgment upon the "city and
the sanctuary" (Dan. 9:26) for the nation's rejection of the promised
Messiah (John 1:11).

The Roman Army and Their Pagan Ensigns

The second, and most popular theory, is that the Roman army caused the
abomination that brought about the desolation when they walked about the
outer court of the temple with their pagan symbols lifted high. While the
sanctuary was engulfed in flames, Roman soldiers set up their legionary
standards, emblazoned with emblems depicting their heathen gods, and
offered sacrifices. John described the Roman desecration this way: "Leave
out the court which is outside the temple and do not measure it, for it has
been given to the nations; and they will tread underfoot the holy city for
forty-two months" (Rev. 11:2). The Romans did in fact tread underfoot the
Holy City for three and one-half years. As has already been noted, an
abomination that causes desolation is caused by God's people. Why should
the temple be destroyed for something the Romans did to the temple? The
Romans were God's instrument of judgment similar to the way the
Assyrians and Babylonians were instruments of God's judgment when
Israel and Judah continued to sin during the period of the Old Covenant.
New Testament Jerusalem is identified as "Sodom and Egypt where also
their Lord was crucified" (Rev. 11:8) and later as "Babylon the Great, the
mother of harlots and of the abominations of the earth" (17:5).

Israel's Priesthood
It is likely that Jesus had more in mind than the abominable acts that took
place by the Zealots' desecration of the temple, although their actions no
doubt contributed to the abomination. This second theory regards the
actions of the priesthood as the abomination. Many of Israel's priests were
corrupt, and the sacrifices were an abomination since the priests denied the
atoning work of Jesus as a finished work. After God's ultimate, once and for
all sacrifice (Heb. 9:12; 1 Peter 3:18), a sacrifice of any animal would be
considered an abomination to God, like what it would have meant to
slaughter an unclean animal under the old covenant (Deut. 17:1).
Earlier in Israel's history, God threatened desolation because the Jews
had defiled the temple with detestable things and abominations. "'So as I
live,' declares the Lord GOD, 'surely, because you have defiled My sanctuary
with all your detestable idols and with all your abominations, therefore I
will also withdraw, and My eye shall have no pity and I will not spare'"
(Ezek. 5:11). The first temple was destroyed because of what Israel's priests
did there.
The Jews of Jesus' day had turned the temple into a "house of
merchandise" (John 2:16) and a "robbers' den" (Matt. 21:13). Jesus, as the
High Priest "who has passed through the heavens" (Heb. 4:14), inspected
the temple twice, found it leprous (unclean), and issued His priestly
evaluation: "Jesus came out from the temple" (Matt. 24:1), as the priest
"shall come out from the house" (Lev. 14:38), and declared it "desolate"
(Matt. 23:38), as the priest declared a leprous house to be "unclean" (Lev.
14:44). A leprous house could be cleansed in only one way: "He shall
therefore tear down the house, its stones, and its timbers, and all the plaster
of the house, and he shall take them outside the city to an unclean place"
(Lev. 14:45). When Jesus' disciples pointed to the temple buildings after
hearing of its promised desolation, Jesus answered, "Do you not see all
these things? Truly I say to you, not one stone here shall be left upon
another, which will not be torn down" (Matt. 24:2).
The religious leaders, especially the priests, rejected Jesus as the Messiah
(Matt. 26:57-68). Instead of choosing Jesus, they "persuaded the multitudes
to ask for Barabbas and to put Jesus to death" (27:20). With the true Lamb
slain, the earthly temple could no longer operate as a place of true sacrifice.
The action of the high priest, "standing in the holy place" (24:15),
continuing to offer sacrifices in the temple, was an abomination, a rejection
of the work of Christ.
Josephus writes of the selection of what we would call a religious clown:

They accordingly summoned one of the high-priestly clans, called

Eniachin, and cast lots for a high priest. By chance the lot fell to one
who proved a signal illustration of their depravity; he was an
individual named Phanni, son of Samuel, of the village of Aphthia, a
 man who not only was not descended from high priests, but was such a
clown that he scarcely knew what the high priesthood meant. At any
rate they dragged their reluctant victim out of the country and, dressing
him up for his assumed part, as on the stage, put the sacred vestments
upon him and instructed him how to act in keeping with the occasion.
To them this monstrous impiety was a subject for jesting and sport, but
the other priests, beholding from a distance this mockery of their law,
could not restrain their tears and bemoaned the degradation of the
sacred honors.13

The elevation of Phanni to the role of high priest would have been seen by
Jewish Christians in Jerusalem as the height of an abominable act. William
Lane writes that these Jewish Christians "probably … recognized in Phanni
'the appalling sacrilege usurping a position which is not his,' consigning the
temple to destruction."14
Josephus himself seems to agree with this assessment by referencing "a
certain ancient oracle ... that the city should then be taken and the sanctuary
burnt, by right of war, when a sedition should invade the Jews, and their
own hand should pollute the temple of God. Now while these zealots did
not [quite] disbelieve these predictions, they made themselves the
instruments of their accomplishment."15
The following is a summary of this view by James Jordan from his three-
part article "The Abomination of Desolation: An Alternate Hypothesis":

As a result of my studies in Leviticus, I have come to the conclusion

that the abomination of desolation spoken of in Daniel 9 and Matthew
24 is none other than apostate Judaism, and that the Man of Sin spoken
of in 2 Thessalonians 2 is the apostate High Priest of Israel….With the
death of Christ, the sacrificial system came to an end. Any blood
sacrifices offered after the cross were potential abominations…
Returning to the time of the Maccabees and Daniel 11 [especially
verse 31], we need to ask who were the "forces from him" that
desecrated the sanctuary and set up the desolating sacrilege? They
were the reigning High Priests Jason and Menelaus, who apostatized to
Greek religion, and who invited Antiochus to help them take over
Jerusalem for their own purposes (Josephus, Antiquities 12:5:1). In the
same way, the apostate High Priests between A.D. 30 and 70
cooperated with the Romans ... to suppress the Christian faith and...
maintain their own Sadducean combination of Greek philosophy and
apostate Judaism…
False worship is idolatrous worship. When the Jews rejected Jesus
and kept offering sacrifices, they were engaged in idolatry. This was
the "wing of abominations" that took place in the Temple. It is why the
Temple was ultimately destroyed. The particular desecration that took
place was the massacre of converted Jews that took place just before
A.D. 70, as prophesied in the book of Revelation. It was the blood of
those saints (Rev. 14) that Jerusalem was made to drink (Rev. 17) to
her own destruction.
A full picture of this is provided in Ezekiel 8-11. I shall not expound
the passage at this point, but simply direct you to it. There you will see
that when the apostate Jews of Ezekiel's day performed the sacrifices,
God viewed them as an abomination. He called the holy shrine an
"idol of jealousy, that provokes to jealousy" (8:3). The Jews had
treated the Temple and the Ark as idols, and so God would destroy
them, as He had the golden calf. Ezekiel sees God pack up and move
out of the Temple, leaving it empty or "desolate." The abominations
have caused the Temple to become desolate. Once God had left, the
armies of Nebuchadnezzar swept in and destroyed the empty Temple.
(When we remember that Ezekiel and Daniel prophesied at the time,
the correlation becomes even more credible.)
This is what happened in Matthew 24. Jesus had twice inspected the
Temple for signs of leprosy (Lev. 14:33-47; the two so-called
cleansings of the Temple in John 2 and Matthew 21). Jesus had found
that the Temple was indeed leprous, and as the True Priest He
condemned it to be torn down, in accordance with the Levitical law.
"And Jesus came out from the Temple [leaving it desolate; God
departing] and was going away [compare Ezekiel], when His disciples
came up to point out the Temple buildings to Him. And He answered
and said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you,
not one stone here shall be left upon another which will not be torn
down'" (Matt. 24:1-2).16

MATTHEW 24:17-20
"WHOEVER IS ON THE HOUSETOP MUST NOT
GO DOWN TO GET THE THINGS OUT THAT
ARE IN HIS HOUSE. WHOEVER IS IN THE FIELD
 ARE IN HIS HOUSE. WHOEVER IS IN THE FIELD
MUST NOT TURN BACK TO GET HIS CLOAK. BUT
WOE TO THOSE WHO ARE PREGNANT AND TO
THOSE WHO ARE NURSING BABIES IN THOSE
DAYS! BUT PRAY THAT YOUR FLIGHT WILL NOT
BE IN THE WINTER, OR ON A SABBATH."

In these verses, Jesus tells His disciples that when the temple's approaching
desolation became evident, it would be time to head for the hills. Most
roofs in Israel were flat with an outside staircase (Mark 2:4) designed for
occupancy (Deut. 22:8), storage (Josh. 2:6), and rest in the evening (2 Sam.
11:2). In addition, Jesus referred to the strict Sabbath laws in effect at that
time. An acceptable distance for travel on the Sabbath was about three-
fifths of a mile as determined by Pharisaical law (Acts 1:12), not enough
travel-distance to get out of harm's way during Jerusalem's sign-laden
destruction.
History shows that Christian Jews did heed Jesus' warning before the
armies of Titus captured the city. Most who remained were slaughtered.
Estimates put the number killed at more than one million! Thousands more
were taken into captivity and enslaved by the Romans. "The Emperor
Vespasian brought 20,000 Jewish slaves to Rome after the Romans
destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. The Arch of Titus depicts a menorah
as part of the plunder from Jerusalem. Vespasian and his successor Titus
used the slaves to build the Roman Coliseum."
The prophecy regarding pregnant (Luke 19:44: "your children within
you") and nursing mothers and young children (Matt. 24:19) fits the time
parameters of the Olivet Discourse leading to the destruction of the temple
in the generation of Jews to whom Jesus was speaking. Josephus, an
eyewitness to the events, describes a horrific scene of "the cruel massacre
of women and children" and "the painful famine in which the people
suffered so terribly while Jerusalem was besieged."17
James Jordan makes an interesting typological connection to Jesus
mentioning leaving the cloak behind:

The man working in the field is not to bother going back for anything,
not even his cloak. The cloak is the one thing that is so precious and
needful that it cannot be taken as a pledge during the nighttime hours,
but has to be returned each night to its owner [Ex. 22:26-27]. Leaving
the cloak behind, then, means leaving everything behind.
 Jesus had already made this point in the Sermon on the Mount,
where He told his followers to be ready to give up their cloaks if that
was demanded of them (Matthew 5:40).
Did Jesus mean that the believers should literally leave their cloaks
behind, even in winter, when they would need them on the road? I
don't think so. Again, I think we have to take Jesus' command as an
epigram. First, it means to be ready to leave everything behind, just as
Jesus left his tunic at the foot of the cross and soldiers gambled for it
[Ps. 22:18; Matt. 27:35; John 19:23]. But it probably has a deeper
meaning also. In Matthew, Jesus has said that no one sews a patch of
new cloth on an old cloak, but instead turns the old one into a rag and
makes a new cloak of new cloth (Matthew 9:16).... Leave behind the
cloak of the Old Covenant. You won't need it any longer.18

With the destruction of the temple, its sacrifices, and sinful priesthood done
away with and a new temple (John 2:19), perfect sacrifice (1:29), and new
sinless priest (Heb. 7:26-28), the remnants of the Old Covenant were
abolished at the cross and outwardly demonstrated with the destruction of
the temple.

1. Tim LaHaye, ed. Prophecy Study Bible (Chattanooga, TN: AMG

Publishers, 2000), 1038, note on Matthew 24:15.
2. D. A. Carson, "Matthew" in The Expositor's Bible Commentary
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1985), 501.
3. David J. Palm, "The Signs of His Coming: An Examination of the
Olivet Discourse from a Preterist Perspective," Submitted to the Faculty at
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (June 1993), 93.
4. Palm, "The Signs of His Coming: An Examination of the Olivet
Discourse from a Preterist Perspective," 97.
5. Harold Fowler, The Gospel of Matthew, 4 vols. (Joplin, MO:
College Press Publishing Co., 1985), 4:46.
6. James B. Jordan An Extended Historical, Literary, Theological, and
Homiletical Commentary Upon the Eschatological Discourse of Jesus
Christ..." (unpublished manuscript).
7. Edward Hayes Plumptre, "The Gospel According to St. Matthew,"
in A New Testament Commentary for English Readers, ed. Charles John
Ellicott, 3 vols. (London: Cassell and Co., 1897), 1:147.
8. Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 4.3.6-10 and 4.5.4.
9. William L. Lane, Commentary on the Gospel of Mark (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 469.
10. Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 5.1.3.
11. Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 5.1.3.
12. Martin Hengel, The Zealots: Investigations into the Jewish
Freedom Movement in the Period from Herod I until 70 A.D., trans. David
Smith (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, [1976] 1989), 305.
13. Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 4.3.8.
14. Lane, Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, 469.
15. Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 4.6.3.
16. https://goo.gl/Tk953a
17. J. G. Matteson, Prophecies of Jesus: The Fulfillment of the
Predictions of Our Saviour and His Prophets (Battle Creek: International
Tract Society, 1895), 86.
18. Jordan, An Extended Historical, Literary, Theological, and
Homiletical Commentary Upon the Eschatological Discourse of Jesus
Christ...
 SIX

A Great Tribulation

MATTHEW 24:21
"FOR THEN THERE WILL BE A GREAT TRIBULATION,
SUCH AS HAS NOT OCCURRED SINCE THE
BEGINNING OF THE WORLD UNTIL NOW,
NOR EVER WILL."

We've seen in Matthew 24:9 that the first-century Christians went through a
period of tribulation. In Luke's version of the Olivet Discourse, we read,
"They will lay their hands on you and will persecute you, delivering you to
the synagogues and prisons, bringing you before kings and governors for
My name's sake... [Y]ou will be betrayed even by parents and brothers and
relatives and friends, and they will put some of you to death, and you will
be hated by all because of My name" (Luke 21:12, 16-17; also Matt. 10:19-
22; Mark 13:11-13).1

Tribulation Against the Church

The book of Acts describes the beginning of the tribulation that affected the
infant church that started with the deaths of Stephen (Acts 7:54-60) and
James (12:1-2). When Herod saw that the murder of James "pleased the
Jews," he seized Peter and "put him in prison" (12:3-5). By the mid-AD
60s, in the lead up to the destruction of Jerusalem, there was a "great
tribulation" against Christians at the hands of many unbelieving Jews (Rev.
7:9-17, especially v. 14; 11:10). These Jews were the antichrists that John
spoke of (1 John 2:18-19, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7), who made up the "synagogue
of Satan" (Rev. 2:9), those "who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie"
(3:9), and "those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the
flesh" (2 John 7). It "is not the children of the flesh who are children of
God, but the children of the promise [who] are regarded as descendants"
(Rom. 9:8).
It needs to be repeated that the first people to embrace Jesus as the
promised Messiah were Jews (Acts 2:5), and the first to reject Jesus were
also Jews. James Jordan comments:

The Judaizers were the heirs of the tradition-serving Jewish teachers

who were Jesus' worst enemy. The Judaizers are the constant enemy in
Acts and the epistles. They are the anti-christs of the Johannine letters,
who claimed to have been sent out by the apostles but who were not
"of us" (1 John 2:18-19; 4:1). They are the main enemy in the book of
Revelation.
The Judaizers fit perfectly Jesus' predictions. They claimed to come
in His name. They misled many. They claimed an anointing, but it was
false. They were false prophets.2

This is why John could write that he was a "fellow-partaker in the

tribulation" (Rev. 1:9) and the church at Smyrna was undergoing
"tribulation" (2:9-10) at the hands of the Jews.
The "woman Jezebel" had infiltrated the church at Thyatira and some had
succumbed to her teachings and were led "astray so that they commit acts
of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols." As a result, God threatens
to "'throw her on a bed of sickness, and those who commit adultery with her
into great tribulation, unless they repent of her deeds. And I will kill her
children with pestilence, and all the churches will know that I am He who
searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according
to your deeds'" (2:20-23).
Matthew's "great tribulation" is synonymous with Luke's "great distress"
(Luke 21:23). Some prophecy writers argue that Luke is describing events
related to events leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in
AD 70, while Matthew is describing a great tribulation that will affect a
future generation. A comparison of the two accounts shows they are
describing the same events. There are differences, but there are differences
in the two birth accounts of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, and yet no one
argues they describe two births of two Messiahs named Jesus separated by
thousands of years. By combining the elements of Matthew and Luke, we
get a more complete picture of the prophecy, as we do with the birth
narratives.
Both prophecies end with "this generation will not pass away" (Matt.
24:34; Luke 21:32). As we've seen, "this generation" refers to the
generation that was in existence at the time Jesus prophesied about the "end
of the age" that coincided with the destruction of the temple. If Jesus had a
future generation in mind in either of these accounts, He would have used
"that generation" to clear up any possible confusion. "In all probability,"
Craig Blomberg writes, "Jesus originally uttered one connected, coherent
eschatological discourse from which the three Synoptists [Matthew, Mark,
and Luke] have chosen to reproduce different portions in different places."3

Time of the Gentiles

The use of "this generation" in all three accounts describes the end-point of
the prophecy. Randall Price identifies twenty-two terms and expressions
used by Old Testament writers to describe what he argues identify the great
tribulation of Matthew 24:21.4 Four of them — "desolation," "distress,"
"vengeance," and "wrath" — are used in Luke 21:20-24. It's obvious,
therefore, that the "great tribulation" in Matthew 24:21 is the same as the
"great distress" of Luke 21:23. Notice that Luke describes this "great
distress" in local terms: "for there will be great distress upon the land, and
wrath to this people, and they will fall by the edge of the sword [not jets,
tanks, and rifles], and will be led captive into all nations; and Jerusalem will
be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be
fulfilled" (21:23-24). Here's how Milton Terry interprets "times of the
Gentiles":

The statement of Luke xxi, 24, that "Jerusalem shall be trodden down
by the Gentiles until the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled," is supposed
to involve events which did not take place in that generation. The
"times of the Gentiles" [nations] (καιροὶ ἐθνῶν / kairoi ethnown) are
assumed to be the times of the opportunities of grace afforded to the
Gentiles under the Gospel. But to understand the words in this sense
would be, as Van Oosterzee observes, to interpolate a thought entirely
foreign to the context. "The times of the Gentiles," says Bengel, "are
the times allotted to the Gentiles to tread down the city;" but there is
nothing in the passage or context to authorize his further remark that
"these times shall be ended when the Gentiles' conversion shall be full
 consummated," and that the treading down by Romans, Persians,
Saracens, Franks, and Turks is to be understood. These καιροὶ
[kairoi/times] are manifestly times of judgment upon Jerusalem, not
times of salvation to the Gentiles. The most natural and obvious
parallel is Rev. xi. 2, where the outer court of the temple is said to be
"given to the Gentiles," by whom the holy city shall be trodden down
forty-two months, a period equivalent to the "time and times and half a
time" of Rev. xii, 14, and of Dan. vii, 25; xii, 7. This is a symbolical
period of judgment..., but does not denote ages and generations. It is
three and a half — a divided seven, a short but signal period of woe.
The "times of the Gentiles," therefore, are the three and a half times
(approximating three and a half years) during which the Gentile armies
besieged and trampled down Jerusalem.5

The use of "swords" makes it an ancient battle. "This people" refers to the
Jews. Jesus was not describing a worldwide tribulation in Matthew 24:21.
The geographical context is Judea: "Then let those who are in Judea flee to
the mountains" (24:16). Luke describes the time of "great distress" as being
"upon the land," that is, the land of Israel (Luke 21:23-24). All a person had
to do to escape the impending tribulation was to leave the city and head for
the mountains. Therefore, the boundary of the "great tribulation" was
mostly confined to Judea. How could anyone on foot, carrying a nursing
baby, escape if a modern-day tribulation is in view? Tanks and jet planes
would thwart any attempted exodus from almost anywhere in the world.
Luke mentions some Jews "will be led captive into all nations." Bear in
mind that the Roman Empire was an empire of conquered nations. Spain
was a nation (Rom. 15:28), as was Greece (John 7:35; Acts 14:1; 17:4;
18:4; Rom. 1:16), as well as others (1 Tim. 3:16; Acts 2:5-11).

The Crime of the Ages

Tim LaHaye says the passage in Luke 21 refers to the first-century
destruction of Jerusalem where, "According to the historian Josephus, the
Romans took over 100,000 Jewish captives to Egypt and sold them as
slaves to the merchants of the world."6 If the great affliction in Luke 21
refers to the first-century destruction of Jerusalem, then so does the great
tribulation in Matthew 24 since they begin and end in the same way: the
destruction of the temple (Matt. 24:2/Luke 21:6) and "this generation" not
passing away (Matt. 24:3/Luke 21:32).
 The tribulation is described as "great" because the crime that brought it
on was great. The chief priests and religious leaders, in collusion with the
Roman government in Judea, crucified the "Lord of glory" (1 Cor. 2:8; see
Acts 2:22-23). Jesus' disciples described it this way: "The chief priests and
our rulers delivered Him to the sentence of death, and crucified Him" (Luke
24:20; 23:13). Peter declared that his fellow-countrymen "disowned the
Holy and Righteous One and asked for a murderer ... [and] put to death the
Prince of life" (Acts 3:14-15; cf. 1 Thess. 2:15). Today's Jews did not
deliver Jesus up to death, so why should they endure "God's righteous
judgment" for this crime (2 Thess. 1:5)? The outpouring of God's wrath in
tribulation came upon the generation that chose Caesar over Jesus (John
19:15):

• The blood of all the prophets, shed since the foundation of the world,
may be charged against this generation, from the blood of Abel to the
blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the house of
God; yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation" (Luke
11:50-51).

• When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a
riot was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the
crowd, saying, "I am innocent of this Man's blood; see to that
yourselves!" And all the people said, "His blood shall be on us and on
our children!' Then he released Barabbas for them; but after having
Jesus scourged, he handed Him over to be crucified" (Matt. 27:24-26).

• They cried out, "Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him!"
Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests
answered, "We have no king but Caesar" (John 19:15).

It's not surprise that Luke records Jesus saying, "these are days of
vengeance, in order that all things which are written may be fulfilled"
(21:22). To what particular prophecies was Jesus referring?

Therefore, on account of you

Zion will be plowed as a field,
Jerusalem will become a heap of ruins,
And the mountain of the temple will become
high places of a forest (Micah 3:12).
From the prophet Jeremiah we find this prophetic announcement:

And you will say to them, "Thus says the LORD, 'If you will not listen
to Me, to walk in My law which I have set before you, to listen to the
words of My servants the prophets, whom I have been sending to you
again and again, but you have not listened; then I will make this house
like Shiloh, and this city I will make a curse to all the nations of the
earth'" (Jer. 26:4-6).

Most likely, the passage that directly applied to "days of vengeance" is

found in Daniel 9:26: "Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be
cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will
destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even
to the end there will be war; desolations are determined." The desolations
were determined by Jesus when He said, "your house is being left to you
desolate" based on willful disobedience (Matt. 23:38; also Deut. 28:49-57;
1 Kings 9:6-9; Ps. 79:1-13; Isa. 29:2-4; Jer. 22:5; Hosea 10:14-15) and
carried out during the judgment on the Temple and the capital city of Israel
in AD 70. James Jordan offers the following comments on the time, place,
and event of the prophesied "days of vengeance" related to Daniel 9:24-27:

Then after the 62 weeks [plus 7=69], the Messiah [Jesus] will be cut
off [excommunicated by the religious rulers of Israel] and have
nothing [the cross, Phil. 2:7]; and the people of the Prince [the
enthroned Christ] Who is to come will destroy the city [Jerusalem] and
the sanctuary [Temple]. And its end will come with a flood [like Noah,
like the threats of Deut. 28; like the locust flood of Joel]; even to the
end there will be war [the Jewish War of 6670 AD]; desolations are
determined.7

Any Jew familiar with the Hebrew Scriptures should have known that God
would pour out His vengeance because of disobedience and rejection of
their promised redeemer. "Josephus again and again calls attention to the
abnormal wickedness of the Jews as the cause of the divine retribution
which overtook them. In his Wars of the Jews he declares that no generation
and no city was 'so plunged in misery since the foundation of the world.'"8

Boiling Jesus in Jerusalem's Milk

It's at this point that three obscure Old Testament texts come into play.
What does the Bible mean when it prohibited Israel from "boiling a kid in
his mother's milk"? We touched on this earlier. Jordan explains:

It is sometimes thought that boiling a kid in milk was a magic ritual

used by the Canaanites, and that this is why it was forbidden. The text,
however, does not forbid boiling a kid in milk, but in its own mother's
milk... This law is thrice stated in the Torah (Ex. 23:19; 34:26; Dt.
14:21). It is obviously quite important, yet its significance eludes us.
There are many laws which prohibit the mixing of life and death, yet
we wish to know the precise nuance of each….
These passages seem to indicate a symbolic connection between the
kid and a human child, the son of a mother...
Accordingly, one of the most horrible things imaginable is for a
mother to boil and eat her own child. This is precisely what happened
during the siege of Jerusalem, as Jeremiah describes it in Lamentations
4:10, "The hands of compassionate women boiled their own children;
they became food for them because of the destruction of the daughter
of my people." The same thing happened during the siege of Samaria,
as recorded in 2 Kings 6:28ff. In both passages, the mother is said to
boil her child….
Jerusalem is the mother of the seed (Ps. 87:5; Gal. 4:26ff.). When
Jerusalem crucified Jesus Christ, her Seed, she was boiling her kid in
her own milk. In Revelation 17, the apostate Jerusalem has been
devouring her faithful children: "And I saw the woman drunk with the
blood of the saints and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus." Her
punishment, under the Law of Equivalence, is to be devoured by the
gentile kings who supported her (v. 17).9

The "great tribulation" happened to Jews living in Jerusalem in the first

century. The tribulation the Jews leveled against Christians, many of them
also Jews (1 Thess. 2:14-15; 2 Thess. 1:4-8), would be an extension of that
great tribulation. Even so, Jesus gave those living in Jerusalem plenty of
warning to escape. Nothing will ever compare to it because Israel's special
covenantal status at the time was unique. Her sin was great; therefore, her
judgment was great:

For the iniquity of the daughter of my people

Is greater than the sin of Sodom,
Which was overthrown as in a moment,
 And no hands were turned toward her (Lam. 4:6).

The tribulation was so severe in AD 70, and the resultant famine so great
(Matt. 24:7), Josephus records that at least one woman killed, cooked, and
began to eat her own child, an event that horrified even the battle-hardened
Roman soldiers who came upon the scene. Then there's this horrifying
slaughter:

So the soldiers, out of the wrath and hatred they bore the Jews, nailed
those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the
crosses, by way of jest, when their multitude was so great, that room
was wanting for the crosses, and crosses wanting for the bodies.10

The tribulation associated with the destruction of the temple in 586 BC is

described in a similar way using a common "rhetorical superlative" that
Jesus uses in Luke 7:28 when He says the following about John the Baptist:
"I say to you, among those born of women there is no one greater than
John; yet he who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he." Jesus
was born of a woman. Isn't He greater than John? Here's how the
destruction of the first temple is described:

"And because of all your abominations, I will do among you what I

have not done, and the like of which I will never do again" (Ezek. 5:9).

But it was done again as Jesus said it would be based on His word.

No Double Fulfillment
Some claim that there will be another fulfillment, a future fulfillment. This
is pure guesswork, reading into a section of Scripture what's not there. We
know this because Jesus states there will be a great tribulation before that
contemporary generation passed away. It's a leap in logic to argue that
another such judgment is prophetically assured when nothing is mentioned
about another great tribulation having the same covenantal consequences.
We cannot assume, therefore, that because something happened in the
first century that it could have another prophetic fulfillment when the New
Testament offers no evidence for it. We only know of what was going to
happen to the rebuilt temple because of what Jesus said would happen to
the city and temple. Where do we stop with the number of fulfillments? We
would have to be told that there would be another similar tribulation that
included the temple, animal sacrifices, priesthood, etc. While futurists claim
these series of events will happen again, there are no verses in the New
Testament that support the claim. Jesus is using a common way of
describing significant events:

• Thus He has confirmed His words which He had spoken against us

and against our rulers who ruled us, to bring on us great calamity; for
under the whole heaven there has not been done anything like what
was done to Jerusalem (Dan. 9:12).

• Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the
sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress
such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at
that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will
be rescued (Dan. 12:1).

• Alas! For that day is great,

There is none like it;
And it is the time of Jacob's distress,
But he will be saved from it (Jer. 30:7).

If Israel and Judah's distress was so great that there was "none like it," then
how could a future tribulation be greater? In order to get around this
interpretive problem, futurists claim that "Jacob's distress" is a yet future
great tribulation. But the context of Jeremiah's prophecy says otherwise
since it is describing the nation's captivity under the powers of Jeremiah's
day.
As Jesus describes it, the horror associated with the destruction of the
first temple would be multiplied in the destruction of the second temple and
all that it stood for since the sin was greater, they had "crucified the Lord of
glory" (1 Cor. 2:8) and disowned their Savior "in the presence of Pilate
(Acts 3:13):

It is not needful to go beyond the Prophet Ezekiel to find the sad

fulfillment of these dire threatenings. The book of Lamentations (4:10)
reveals how literally these predictions were realized, when parents ate
their children,11 the conditions of siege driving them to cannibalism.
And the added word was given that the sons would eat their fathers.
Human plight can know no greater depths.12
R. H. Charles comments that the phrase in Matthew 24:21 "is a stock
eschatological expression. It is first found in Dan. xii.1; then in 1 Macc.
ix.27; next in Ass. Mos. viii. 1, and subsequently in Rev. xvi. 18."13
Contrary to Charles, the phrase is used earlier than its appearance in Daniel
12:1. His point, however, that the phrase "is a stock eschatological
expression" is valid. The fact that the events described in Matthew 24:1-33
were to take place before that generation passed away should be enough for
any Christian to believe that the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 was the
most catastrophic judgment the city of Jerusalem ever experienced or will
experience. The wording of Matthew 24:21 is an intentional exaggeration
of language to emphasize the horror and uniqueness of Jerusalem's
judgment.

A Rhetorical Superlative
Could there have been two kings in the southern kingdom of Judah who
were the greatest kings Judah ever had? Logic would dictate that there can
only be one greatest king but any number of great kings. But the Bible tells
us that there were two kings who were the "greatest." How can this be
unless it's an intended over statement for rhetorical purposes similar to the
following?

• He [Hezekiah] trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel; so that after

him there was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor among
those who were before him (2 Kings 18:5).

• And before him [Josiah] there was no king like him who turned to
the LORD with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his might,
according to the law of Moses; nor did any like arise after him (2
Kings 23:25).

In 2 Kings 18:5 it is written of Hezekiah that there would be no king after

him who would show the same devotion to the Lord as he showed. When
we get an assessment of Josiah's reign, which follows Hezekiah's reign, we
are told that "there was no king like him who turned to the LORD." How can
Hezekiah's reign be the greatest (when considering the reign of a future
king like Josiah) and Josiah's reign be the greatest (when considering the
reign of a past king like Hezekiah)? Is this a contradiction given the fact
that the two statements are made in the same book? There are no
contradictions in the Bible. The phraseology is obviously a rhetorical
superlative emphasizing complete devotion to the Lord and His law.
Of King Solomon God said, "Behold, I have given you a wise and
discerning heart, so that there has been no one like you before you, nor shall
one like you arise after you" (1 Kings 3:12). As we just saw, both Hezekiah
and Josiah are singled out as the best of the best. Keep in mind that these
descriptions come from the author or authors of the books of Kings. These
kings are not describing themselves and the splendor of their kingly
exploits. There was no attempt to fix a contradiction, because there wasn't
one.
We learn from the New Testament that someone arose after Solomon,
Hezekiah, and Josiah who was more wise and discerning than the three of
them. Jesus says of Himself, "The Queen of the South shall rise up with this
generation at the judgment and shall condemn it, because she came from
the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold,
something greater than Solomon is here" (Matt. 12:42). Jesus surpasses
Solomon, Hezekiah, and Josiah, even though each is described as the
greatest.
Jesus makes a covenantal connection between those in Ezekiel's day and
those in His own day, but with an added feature. They are "sons of those
who murdered the prophets" who would "fill up ... the measure of the guilt
of [their] fathers" (Matt. 23:31-32). The people in Ezekiel's day were not
confronted with the choice to crucify Jesus at the hands of wicked men, and
neither will a future generation of Jews or anyone else. It's no wonder that
commentators have described Jerusalem's destruction as the great
tribulation because Jesus "came to His own, and those who were His own
did not receive Him" (John 1:11).
That's why "the men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation" —
the generation of Jesus' day — "at the judgment, and will condemn it
because they repented at the preaching of Jonah," and "the Queen of the
South will rise up with this generation at the judgment and will condemn it,
because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of
Solomon" because "something greater than Solomon" was in their midst
(Matt. 12:38-45). That something greater was Jesus who surpassed all "the
greatest" kings in Israel's history.

• "The destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 ... was the greatest single

event of a thousand years, and religiously significant beyond anything
else that ever occurred in human history."14
 • "The destruction of Jerusalem was more terrible than anything that
the world has ever witnessed, either before or since. Even Titus
seemed to see in his cruel work the hand of an avenging God."15

• "[The] tribulation to Israel [was] unparalleled in the terrible past of

its history, and unequaled even in its bloody future. Nay, so dreadful
would be the persecution, that, if Divine mercy had not interposed for
the sake of the followers of Christ, the whole Jewish race that
inhabited the land would have been swept away."16

• "No judgment had ever and can ever be so severe. In the history of
the world no judgment can be compared with this that wiped out the
Jews as a nation."17

• "Other sieges may have witnessed, before and since, scenes of

physical wretchedness equally appalling, but nothing that history
records offers anything parallel to the alternations of fanatic hope and
frenzied despair that attended the breaking up of the faith and polity of
Israel."18

No harm would have come to anyone living in Jerusalem at that time had
they fled the city as Jesus had warned. In addition, "It makes little sense to
speak of a calamity which will never be equaled again if the next major
events shortly to follow are the Parousia of Christ, the Final Judgment and
the Eternal State. The phrasing of the verse suggests that human history
extends well beyond this time of 'great distress' (cf. Joel 2:2)."19 In fact, it
has.
None of the above preterist (past) interpretation is to suggest that
Christians do not experience tribulation today. Christians around the world
are experiencing periods of tribulation, for example, at the hands of radical
Muslims. "These things I have spoken to you, so that in Me you may have
peace. In the world you have tribulation, but take courage; I have overcome
the world" (John 16:33) and "If the world hates you, you know that it has
hated Me before it hated you" (15:18).

1. The following seems to be a contradiction: "Yet not a hair of your

head will perish. By your endurance you will gain your lives [souls]" (Luke
21:18-19). How is it possible that some of them would be put to death and
at the same time not a hair of their head would perish? "Hair" is a
metonymy for a person's life, or as the literal rendering would be, "soul"
(ψυχή/psuchē: the root of the English words "psyche" and "psychology"). A
metonymy is a literary device where a part of something is used for the
whole: "The pen (the written word) is mightier than the sword
(governmental force)."
When Jesus cites Isaiah 29:13 about people honoring God with their
"lips," the word "lips" represents the words they are speaking (Matt. 15:8)
which in turn reflects the intention of the heart, and the heart is the whole
person. When Paul said, "Your blood be on your own heads!" (Acts 18:6),
he had more in mind than their blood and heads (2 Sam. 1:16; 1 Kings 2:33;
Ezek. 18:13; 33:4, 6, 8; Matt. 27:25; Acts 20:26). While those in Jesus'
company may die physically, they will not come under covenantal
judgment. Shaving the head (Job 1:20; Isa. 15:2; 22:12; Jer. 16:6; 41:5;
47:5; 48:36-37), cutting the hair (Judges 16:19), pulling out the beard (Ezra
9:3), and crushing the head (Gen. 3:15 Judges 4:1822; 9:53; Rom. 16:20)
are symbols of judgment that refer to a more significant set of covenantal
sanctions.
2. James B. Jordan, An Extended Historical, Literary, Theological, and
Homiletical Commentary Upon the Eschatological Discourse of Jesus
Christ....
3. Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels
(Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2008), 185.
4. J. Randall Price, "Old Testament Tribulation Terms," When the
Trumpet Sounds, eds. Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy (Eugene, OR:
Harvest House, 1995), 61.
5. Milton S. Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics: A Treatise on the
Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments (New York: Phillips & Hunt,
1883), 445. In a note, Terry adds: "Meyer explains the passage 'till the
times of the Gentiles be fulfilled,' as meaning 'till the time that the periods
which are appointed to the Gentiles for the completion of divine judgments
(not the period of grace for the Gentiles, as Ebrard foists into the passage)
shall have run out. Comp. Rev. xi, 2. Such times of the Gentiles are ended
in the case in question by the parousia (verses 25-27) which is to occur
during the lifetime of the hearers (ver. 28); hence those Kaipoi are in no
way to be regarded as of longer duration.' — Critical Commentary, in loco."
6. LaHaye, Prophecy Study Bible, 1118, note on Luke 21:24.
7. James B. Jordan, "The Abomination of Desolation: Part 1," Biblical
Horizons, No. 25 (May 1991): https://goo.gl/e4fLq9
8. R.W. Farrar, The Gospel According to St. Luke (Cambridge Bible
for Schools and Colleges) (Cambridge University Press, 1891), 318.
9. James Jordan, The Law of the Covenant: An Exposition of Exodus
21-23 (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1990), 190-192.
10. Wars of the Jews, 5.11.1. William Whiston adds the following note
to his translation: "Reland very properly takes notice here, how justly this
judgment came upon the Jews, when they were crucified in such multitudes
together, that the Romans wanted room for the crosses, and crosses for the
bodies of these Jews, since they had brought this judgment on themselves
by the crucifixion of their Messiah." This comment is reminiscent of those
who had a hand in the crucifixion of Jesus: "Then answered all the people,
and said, His blood be on us, and on our children." (Matt. 27:25).
11. "The hands of compassionate women boiled their own children;
they became food for them because of the destruction of the daughter of my
people" (Lam. 4:10; also Lev. 26:29; Deut. 28:57; 2 Kings 6:24-30; Jer.
19:9; Lam. 2:20; Ezek. 5:10).
12. Charles Lee Feinberg, The Prophecy of Ezekiel: The Glory of the
Lord (Chicago: Moody Press, 1969), 38.
13. R. H. Charles, A Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life
in Israel, in Judaism, and in Christianity or Hebrew, Jewish, and Christian
Eschatology from Pre-Prophetic Times till the Close of the New Testament
Canon (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1899), 329, note 1.
14. James Burton Coffman, Commentary on James, 1 & 2 Peter
(Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University Press, n.d.), 231.
15. Charles Haddon Spurgeon, Commentary on Matthew (Grand
Rapids, MI: Fleming H. Revell, [1987] 1995), 340. This commentary was
originally published as Matthew: The Gospel of the Kingdom (London:
Passmore and Alabaster, 1893).
16. Alfred Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, two-
volume ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, [1883] 1971) 2:449.
17. R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of Matthew (Minneapolis:
Augsburg, 1943), 940.
18. E. H. Plumptre, "Matthew," Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole
Bible, ed. C. J. Ellicott (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959), 6:148.
 19. David J. Palm, "The Signs of His Coming: An Examination of the
Olivet Discourse from a Preterist Perspective," Submitted to the Faculty at
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (June 1993), 99.
 SEVEN

No Life Saved, False Christs, In the Wilderness,

Lightning, Coming of the Son of Man

MATTHEW 24:22
"UNLESS THOSE DAYS HAD BEEN CUT SHORT,
NO LIFE WOULD HAVE BEEN SAVED; BUT FOR
THE SAKE OF THE ELECT THOSE DAYS
WILL BE CUT SHORT."

Jesus was telling His disciples that the tribulation that was coming would be
shortened "for the sake of the elect," and they were not to be discouraged.
Not only would some of their fellow countrymen oppose them (Acts 5:17-
32; 7:54-16; 8:1-3; 9:1-2; 10:1; 23:12-14, 21; 1 Thess. 2:14-15) and collude
with the Romans against Christians (Acts 17:1-9; 24:1-9), but also Herod
(12:1-4) and later the Romans would martyr many Christians under the
ruthless rule of Nero Caesar.
The temptation to modify the gospel because of persecution from their
fellow-Jews and return to the old ways of Pharisaical tradition (Mark 7:1-
13) would have been appealing to some like the freed slaves from Egypt
wanted to return. Paul confronted Peter "to his face" (Gal. 2:11) because
"he feared the party of the circumcision." As a result, "[t]he rest of the Jews
joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried
away by their hypocrisy" (2:12-13). In fact, as pressure from the Jews
increased, there were those who abandoned the faith altogether (2 Tim.
1:15; 4:10, 16; 1 John 2:19; Acts 20:29-30). Jesus had warned, "the spirit is
willing, but the flesh is weak" (Matt. 26:41).
 The tribulation of AD 70 was so severe that if God had allowed the
Romans to continue their devastation, not a single Jew living in Judea and
its outlying districts would have survived. For the Romans, Christian Jews
were not considered a separate religious sect but simply Jews of a lesser
faction who were part of the larger Jewish rebellion.
What do we make of Jesus' statement that "no life [lit., all flesh] would
have been saved"? (Matt. 24:22; Mark 13:20). Some commentators claim
that the use of "all flesh" must be a reference to the whole world as we
know it today. Let's see what others say about this argument. "[A]ccording
to the context," William Lane, in his commentary on Mark, writes, "pasa
sarx ('all flesh'] ... must be understood of Judea and Jerusalem."1 In other
contexts, "all flesh" does not always mean every person without exception,
that is, every person alive in the entire world at a given time. "But this is
what was spoken of through the prophet Joel,... 'That I will pour forth of
My Spirit upon all flesh'" (Acts 2:16-17). The context makes it clear that
"all flesh" is a reference to all types of people: sons and daughters, young
men and old men, and bond slaves, both men and women. Not everyone
without exception, but everyone without distinction, Jews as well as
Gentiles.2
Every person in the world was not present at Pentecost, and yet the
language is universal in scope (Acts 2:5). Joel's prophecy was fulfilled in
Peter's day. "This is what was spoken," a reference to the events of that
day, Peter tells his skeptical audience. To get around this clear statement,
Thomas Ice adds the word "like" to the passage to make it fit his prophetic
system: "But this is [like] that which was spoken by the prophet Joel." He
tries to explain why he finds it necessary to add "like" to the text: "The
unique statement of Peter ('this is that') is in the language of comparison
and similarity, not fulfillment."3 Ice insists on interpreting the Bible
"literally." How does adding "like" to a passage follow a literal
hermeneutic? Stanley D. Toussaint argues that "[t]his clause does not mean,
'This is like that'; it means Pentecost fulfilled what Joel had described."4 I.
Howard Marshall states, "The first and main theme of the prophecy is that
God is going to pour out his Spirit upon all peoples, i.e. upon all kinds of
people5 and not just upon the prophets, kings, and priests, as had been the
case in Old Testament times."6
The Old Testament also uses "all flesh" in terms of limited geography:
"On all the bare heights in the wilderness destroyers have come, for the
sword of the LORD is devouring from one end of the land [eretz] even to the
other; there is no peace for anyone [lit., all flesh]" (Jer. 12:12). "'All flesh'
is limited by the context to all flesh in the land of Judah . . . the whole sinful
population of Judah."7 In addition to Jeremiah 12:12, Isaiah 66:16 is a
statement of a localized judgment even though the phrase "all flesh" is
used:

[All flesh] stands for those of the Jewish nation, the great majority,
who have abandoned the Lord for the service of idols. The verse
pictures the judgment to fall upon the Jewish nation at the time of
Christ, with all the actual tragic consequences of that judgment in the
sufferings that befell the Jews until the destruction of the temple in
A.D. 70. It is this of which our Lord speaks in Matthew 24:22 (note
His usage of the words pasa sarx, all flesh)?

After dismissing interpretations that apply Isaiah 66:16 to "the battle of

Armageddon," J. A. Alexander argues that

the Apocalyptic prophecies are exegetical of those in the Old

Testament, from which their images and terms are borrowed. — A
much surer clue to the primary application of the one before us is
afforded by our Saviour's words in Matt xxiv. 22, where in speaking of
the speedy destruction of Jerusalem he says, that excepting the elect no
flesh should be saved, i.e. no portion of the Jewish race but those who
were ordained to everlasting life through faith in him.9

There are other Old Testament passages where "all flesh" does not refer to
every person in the world. In Ezekiel 21:4-5 we read, "Because I will cut
off from you the righteous and the wicked, therefore My sword will go
forth from its sheath against all flesh from south to north. Thus all flesh
will know that I, the Lord, have drawn My sword out of its sheath. It will
not return to its sheath again." To whom is this threat directed? "Son of
man, set your face toward Jerusalem, and speak against the sanctuaries and
prophesy against the land of Israel" (21:2). While the book of Zephaniah
does not use the phrase "all flesh," it does describe completely removing
"all things from the face of the earth" that includes "man and beast ... birds
of the sky and the fish of the sea" (1:2-3). The following certainly passes
for "all flesh": "'And I will cut off man from the face of the earth [or land],'
declares the Lord" (1:3).
Is Zephaniah describing a distant global catastrophe? Not at all. The
threat of judgment — "the day of the Lord"— is said to be "near" (1:7),
"near and coming quickly" (1:14). And who is the intended audience?

So I will stretch out My hand against Judah

And against all the inhabitants of Jerusalem.
And I will cut off the remnant of Baal from this place,
And the names of the idolatrous priests along with the
priests (1:4).

The threat is to "make a complete end.... of all the inhabitants of the earth
[land]" (1:18). Apocalyptic language is used to describe a local judgment on
Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Lane makes the point that such
language would have been understood by any first-century reader of the
Bible and those who first heard Jesus' message of judgment because it was
a literary device used often in the Bible and other contemporary literature:

The severity of the distress that will accompany the destruction of

Jerusalem is vividly suggested through Semitic hyperbole. It is
characteristic for oracles of judgment to be couched in language that is
universal and radical. The intention is to indicate that through human
events God intervenes powerfully to modify the course of history.10

Contrary to Stanley Toussaint's claim that "'[a]ll flesh' describes all

humanity" and that "the Tribulation described in Matthew 24:21 is of such
huge proportions that human life stands in jeopardy on planet earth,"11 it is
better to read "all flesh" in the context of Matthew 24 to mean nothing more
than those living in Judea at the time of the sack of Jerusalem, "presumably
meaning specifically those caught up in the thlipsis [tribulation] of v. 19."12
The referents, like in Zephaniah 1, are "those who are in Judea" (Matt.
24:16), not the world or even the Roman Empire (oikoumenē).
If "no life would have been saved" referred to the whole world, then why
does Jesus designate the mountains surrounding Jerusalem as a place of
safety? This is hardly a description of a world-wide tribulation if going to
the mountains outside Jerusalem allows people to escape the coming
conflagration on foot. Who in the rest of the world could get there in time?
By escaping this "great tribulation," they will be "saved" in a physical
sense (Matt. 24:22). Henry Hammond writes "that σωθήσεται ['will be
saved'] is not always to be interpreted of eternal salvation, but of temporal
escaping (any more than σωτηρία does ... where it is clearly the deliverance
of the Israelites out of Egypt by Moses [Acts 7:25; see Gen. 19:19]."13 Most
translations translate σωτηρία ("salvation") in Acts 7:25 as "deliverance,"
that is, physical deliverance by Moses from the oppression of the
Egyptians. This meaning of "saved" is common in Matthew's gospel: "For
she was saying to herself, 'If I only touch His garment, I will get well [using
a form of [σῴζω].' But Jesus turning and seeing her said, 'Daughter, take
courage; your faith has made you well. At once the woman was made well
[σῴζω]" (Matt. 9:21-22; also 8:25; 14:30; 24:22; 27:40, 42, 49).
We know that the use of "saved" in Matthew 24:13, 22 describes being
rescued from physical calamity and tribulation because Jesus uses the same
phraseology in Matthew 10 when He sends out the twelve "to the lost sheep
of the house of Israel" (10:5-6). The audience is identified by Jesus. It's
very specific and reads very much like what we find in the Olivet
Discourse. For example: "You will be hated by all because of My name, but
it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved [σωθήσεται from
σῴζω]" (Matt. 10:22; cf. 24:13). Even ultra-dispensationalist John Phillips
acknowledges that "[t]he word translated 'shall be saved' [in 10:22] can also
be translated 'shall escape' or 'shall be delivered.'"

MATTHEW 24:23-26
"IF ANYONE SAYS TO YOU, 'BEHOLD, HERE IS THE
CHRIST,' OR 'THERE HE IS,' DO NOT BELIEVE
HIM. FOR FALSE CHRISTS AND FALSE PROPHETS
WILL ARISE AND WILL SHOW GREAT SIGNS
AND WONDERS, SO AS TO MISLEAD, IF POSSIBLE,
EVEN THE ELECT. BEHOLD, I HAVE TOLD YOU IN
ADVANCE. SO IF THEY SAY TO YOU, 'BEHOLD, HE
IS IN THE WILDERNESS,' DO NOT GO OUT, OR,
'BEHOLD, HE IS IN THE INNER ROOMS,'
DO NOT BELIEVE THEM."

Jesus had spoken of false Christs in 24:5 and false prophets in 24:11. In
addition, there would be wars and rumors of wars, "but that is not yet the
end" (24:6), that is, the "end of the age" (24:3). "The end," according to
William Mason, "clearly means the end of the Jewish calamities. If the text
means that every person endures to the end of the world were to be saved,
this would be a strange declaration in this place; but that he who continues a
true believer in Christ, shall not be included in the general wreck of
Jerusalem, is perfectly consistent with the context."14 As the time for the
destruction of Jerusalem drew near, and as the time for that generation was
about to pass away, more false prophets and messianic expectations would
arise.
Thomas Ice says something astounding: "Even if some first-century
individuals did claim to be the Messiah — which they did not — it would
not fulfill this passage."15 Think about his statement. Even if evidence is
put forth demonstrating that there were false christs prior to the destruction
of Jerusalem in AD 70, this fact would not convince Ice that the appearance
of these false christs related to the fulfillment of what Jesus said would take
place before that generation passed away. How is it possible to answer him
if he won't accept evidence to the contrary?
Just as Jesus prophesied, false prophets and false Christs (Matt. 24:5)16
did arise toward the end of that generation. In fact, Paul was thought to be
"the Egyptian who some time ago stirred up a revolt and led the four
thousand men of the Assassins out into the wilderness" (Acts 21:38). This
incident is reminiscent of Jesus' words about those who claimed that He
might be "in the wilderness" (Matt. 24:26). Those who had rejected their
Messiah at the "time of [their] visitation" (Luke 19:44), the same people
who wanted to make Jesus king to overthrow the tyrants of Rome (John
6:15), were still looking for a political savior right up until the time of
Jerusalem's destruction. Josephus wrote:

A false prophet was the occasion of these people's destruction, who

had made a public proclamation in the city that very day, that God
commanded them to get upon the temple, and that there they should
receive miraculous signs of their deliverance. Now, there was then a
great number of false prophets suborned by the tyrants to impose upon
the people, who denounced this to them, that they should wait for
deliverance from God.17

In times of trouble, people look for any glimmer of hope for securing
deliverance. The Israelites' true hope was to embrace Jesus as the Messiah.
Those who did were saved from "the wrath to come" (Matt. 3:7; 1 Thess.
1:10).
The fundamental warning Jesus was giving to His disciples, that in light
of the coming tribulation, there would be the temptation to look for an
imminent physical deliverance similar to how many Christians today are
looking for physical deliverance by being taken off the earth to heaven in a
"rapture." He cautioned them not to be led astray by claims that He would
return physically with an army in tow (John 18:36) to rescue them, no
matter who says it (cf. Gal. 1:8). They are false prophets (Matt. 24:11, 24; 1
John 4:1) who like Jezebel led Israel astray (Rev. 2:20).

MATTHEW 24:27
"FOR JUST AS THE LIGHTNING COMES FROM
THE EAST AND FLASHES EVEN TO THE WEST, SO
WILL THE COMING OF THE SON OF MAN BE."

In the Bible, lightning often signifies the presence of the Lord (Ex. 19:16;
20:18), the manifestation of His power (Ezek. 1:13), and the display of His
awesome judgment against His enemies (Deut. 33:2; 2 Sam. 22:15; Ps.
18:14; 144:6). That was vividly demonstrated when Ezekiel, as the "son of
man," was told to set his face toward Jerusalem to "speak against the
sanctuaries" and to "prophesy against the land of Israel" (Ezek. 21:2). This
description of an impending judgment was against Old Testament Israel and
her temple and land. Similar to wind and fire, lightning does "surrogate
duty for the image of the invisible God.... Scripture uses lightning as
proof of God's terrifying presence. It frightens believer and infidel alike....
As proof that God attends his chosen people in battle, lightning routs his
enemies (Ps. 77:18; 97:4, cf. 144:6; 2 Sam 22:13-15, cf. Ps 18:14)."18 In the
30 occurrences of "lightning" in the Bible, not one of them describes a
global event. Job 37:3 may be the exception if the Hebrew eretz refers to
the "earth" rather than the "land" where Job lived (cf. Gen. 41:53-52:1-6
where eretz is translated "land," "earth," and "ground").
It is no accident that the language and circumstances of Ezekiel's
prophecies regarding the destruction of Jerusalem in the sixth-century BC,
especially the usage of "the son of man"19 for Ezekiel and later for Jesus,
are strikingly similar to the way Jesus described the impending destruction
of Jerusalem in His day. "And because of all your abominations [Matt.
24:15; 23:38], I will do among you what I have not done, and the like of
which I will never do again [Matt. 24:21]" (Ezek. 5:9). God assured
Ezekiel, just as Jesus assured His disciples (Matt. 24:34), that judgment
"comes and it will happen" (Ezek. 21:7). The imagery of a sword "polished
to flash like lightning" is used to describe God's judgment that will make
every heart melt and all hands feeble and all knees weak as water:
 Son of man, prophesy and say, "Thus says the LORD."
Say, "A sword, a sword sharpened
And also polished!
Sharpened to make a slaughter,
Polished to flash like lightning!" (Ezek. 21:9-10)

This sword of judgment is "made for striking like lightning, it is wrapped

up in readiness for slaughter" (21:15). The sword has power to consume
"like lightning" (21:28), swiftly, without warning, and terribly. Therefore,
the image of Jesus as the Son of man, coming in judgment against first-
century Israel, "as the lightning comes from the east," is most appropriate.
Throughout the Old Testament, God came in judgment using language
remarkably similar to Jesus' description of His coming to that first-century
generation:

• The LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of
men had built (Gen. 11:5).

• So I have come down to deliver them from the power of the

Egyptians, and to bring them up from that land to a good and spacious
land (Ex. 3:8).

• He bowed the heavens also, and came down with thick darkness
under His feet ... He sent out His arrows, and scattered them, and
lightning flashes in abundance, and routed them (Ps. 18:9, 14).

• The oracle concerning Egypt. "Behold, the LORD is riding on a swift

cloud, and is about to come to Egypt; the idols of Egypt will tremble
at His presence, and the heart of the Egyptians will melt within them
(Isa. 19:1).

• So will the LORD of hosts come down to wage war on Mount Zion
and on its hill (Isa. 31:4).

• Behold, the LORD is coming forth from His place. He will come
down and tread on the high places of the earth [land]. The mountains
will melt under Him and the valleys will be split, like wax before the
fire, like water poured down a steep place (Mic. 1:3-4).

Earlier in the Gospels, there are references to Jesus' coming to His first-
century audience (Matt. 10:23; 16:27-28). Notice how many times Jesus
threatened to judge the churches of Asia Minor by His coming if they did
not repent (Rev. 2:5, 16; 3:3). It makes no sense if the comings referred to
in these passages were distant future physical comings and appearances.
Furthermore, Jesus stated that His coming in judgment would be before
the last apostle died:

For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with
His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds.
Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here
who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in
His kingdom (Matt. 16:27-28; cf. John 21:1-3).

Jesus uses the Greek word μέλλω (mellō) that is translated more accurately
as "is about to." Youngs Literal Translation translates it, "For, the Son of
Man is about to come in the glory of his Father, with his messengers, and
then he will reward each, according to his work."
This coming had to be far enough in the future that many in Jesus'
audience would be dead, but not so far in the future that everyone was dead.
The fulfillment could not have been the Transfiguration that happened
about a week later. Jesus could not have been describing the events of
Pentecost, since only Judas had died by then (Acts 1:18-19). The reference
could not have been about a distant future comings outlined by
dispensationalists (for His church in a "rapture" and seven years later with
His church after the Great Tribulation), since everyone who heard Jesus
deliver the prophecy is dead. The event that fits the time requirement of the
text is the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
James stated that "the coming of the Lord is at hand" (5:8), "right at the
door" (5:9). "At hand" for whom? James told his readers to "be patient."
How could James have exhorted his readers to be patient if the coming he
was describing was a long way off? "At hand" does not mean thousands of
years. In fact, the definition of "at hand" is in the context: "right at the
door."
Thomas Ice brings up an interesting argument to avoid the consequences
of the time logic of passages related to the coming of the Son of Man:

[O]ur Lord said "some of those standing here..." It is clear that the term
"some" would have to include at least two or more individuals, since
"some" is plural and coupled with a plural verb, "to be." The word
 "some" nicely fits the three disciples — Peter, James, and John
(Matthew 17:1) — who were participants at our Lord's transfiguration.
On the other hand, Peter notes that "John only survived" among the 12
disciples till the destruction of Jerusalem.20

Ron Rhodes and Norman Geisler offer a similar analysis when they argue
that "some of the disciples 'standing' there were no longer alive by A.D.
70."21 They claim that since only John lived after the destruction of
Jerusalem, "some" does not fit the period of time since one (John) is not
"some." If Jesus had said, following Ice's argument, "one of you will not
taste death," then preterists would have a point, but the passage says "some"
which is by definition more than one. The only immediate event that fits,
according to Rhodes, Geisler, and Ice, is the transfiguration.
They fail to consider the full context and audience relevance. Matthew
16:24 reads: "Then Jesus said to His disciples…." The audience of 16:27-
28 is made up of the "disciples" who, as I will show, included Peter, James,
John, and others. Simply put, when Jesus described the time of His
"coming" in Matthew 16:28, Peter, James, and John weren't the only
disciples present. While the apostles are often described as "disciples"
(Matt. 11:1), the word "disciples" includes more than the twelve (Matt. 5:1;
8:21). We read in Luke 10:1 that there were at least 70 others.
It's about a week after that, Jesus discusses His coming to some of those
who will still be alive when Peter, James, and John go up the mount with
Him. After the experience of the transfiguration, we read in Mark's account
of the event: "And when they [Jesus, Peter, James, and John] came back to
the disciples, they saw a large crowd around them, and some scribes
arguing with them" (Mark 9:14). It's obvious, therefore, that the disciples of
Matthew 15-17 are a larger group than the three disciples Jesus chose to
take with Him to see His transfiguration. This means that the plural "some"
fits the context very well.
Jesus clearly indicated that He would be the avenger in Jerusalem's
destruction by coming in judgment (Matt. 16:27-28; 24:27). "But the king
was enraged and sent his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and set
their city on fire" (Matt. 22:7). The Roman armies led by Titus would act as
God's agent to set the city on fire. The armies entered Jerusalem "from the
east" and struck "like lightning" (cf Luke 10:18). In the Old Testament, God
had sent pagan Assyria to judge the Israelites who had turned away from
Him. Assyria was called the "rod of My anger and the staff in whose hands
is My indignation" (Isa. 10:5). Nebuchadnezzar "came to Jerusalem and
besieged it," yet the Lord "gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand"
(Dan. 1:1-2). In a similar way, Rome was the tool Jesus used to judge Israel
in AD 70.
As in Matthew 24:3, Jesus uses the Greek word parousia in 24:27 and
later in vv. 37 and 39. Parousia is most often translated as "coming," being
a synonym for erchomai (24:30). But is "coming" the best translation?

This presence, I remark further, I understand to be a literal one. The

expression, "Christ's literal presence, or coming," is often taken as
meaning nothing less than a material and visible one, so that the denial
of such a coming is thought to be a rejection of the doctrine of his
literal coming. This is wholly unwarranted. It might as well be said
that to deny that God is a material and visible being is to deny his
literal existence. The Parousia is a literal presence, as truly as when
Christ says, "Where two or three are gathered together in my name,
there am I in the midst of them" [Matt. 18:20]. It is not a figurative
one, not one existing constructively or as an object of thought, but a
true, actual presence, as real, though not under the same conditions, as
when he was here in the flesh.
It is also a personal Presence. The same unwarranted restriction of
meaning is often given to this phrase, as if Christ could not be
personally present unless subject to the senses of sight and touch.22

"Coming," as a spatial coming and going, is not the best translation. Nearly
all the Greek lexicons and dictionaries conclude that parousia is best
translated as "presence."23 We should remember that Jesus can manifest His
presence without being physically present (Matt. 28:20). Jesus manifested
His presence in judgment against Jerusalem "like lightning" (Matt. 24:27)
similar to the way God manifested His presence to Israel and her enemies
(Ps. 18:14; 77:18; 97:4; 144:6). "Coming" (ἔρχομαι/erchomai), as in
coming and going, is used in Matthew 24:30 for Jesus "coming on the
clouds of heaven" (see Dan. 7:13).

1. William L. Lane, Commentary on the Gospel of Mark (Grand

Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 471 n. 82.
2. "'All mankind' seems to be defined by what follows: old and young,
women as well as men." Everett F. Harrison, Acts the Expanding Church
(Chicago: Moody Press, 1975), 58.
 3. Tim LaHaye, ed. Prophecy Study Bible (Chattanooga, TN: AMG
Publishers, 2000), 1187, note on Acts 2:16.
4. Stanley D. Toussaint, "Acts," The Bible Knowledge Commentary:
New Testament, eds. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Victor
Books/Scripture Press, 1983), 358. Even after Toussaint writes that
Pentecost was the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy, he muddies the waters by
claiming, "the prophecies of Joel quoted in Acts 2:19-20 were not fulfilled."
Which is it? He says the fulfillment will come "if Israel would repent." But
Israel did repent: "Now having heard this, they were pierced to the heart,
and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, 'Brethren, what shall we do?'
And Peter said to them, 'Repent...'" (2:37-38). The result? "So then, those
who had received his word were baptized; and there were added that day
about three thousand souls" (2:41; also 21:20). The book of Hebrews was
written to Jews. Paul states that God has not forsaken His covenant with
Israel, and he is evidence of that fact (Rom. 11:1). Using the remnant in
Elijah's day as an analogy of what was happening among the Jews, Paul
writes, "In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present
time a remnant according to God's gracious choice" (11:5).
5. "Luke may have seen a reference to Gentiles as well as Jews." I.
Howard Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
1980), 73, note 3.
6. Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles, 73.
7. C.F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old
Testament: Jeremiah, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1950), 1:227.
8. Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah, 3 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1972), 3:530.
9. J. A. Alexander, The Prophecies of Isaiah, one-volume ed. (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1953), 2:470.
10. Lane, Commentary on the Gospel of Mark, 471.
11. Stanley D. Toussaint, "A Critique of the Preterist View of the
Olivet Discourse," an unpublished paper presented to the Pre-Trib Study
Group (Dallas, Texas, 1966), n.p. Quoted in LaHaye and Ice, The End
Times Controversy, 186.
12. R.T. France, The Gospel of Mark (New International Greek
Testament Commentary) (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 528.
 13. Henry Hammond, A Paraphrase and Annotations Upon the Books
of the New Testament, Briefly Explaining all the Difficult Places thereof,
7th ed. (London: 1702), 47.
14. William Mason, Works of William Mason, 4 vols. (London: T.
Cadell, and W. Davies, Strand, 1811), 4:260-261.
15. Thomas Ice, "The Olivet Discourse," The End Times Controversy:
The Second Coming Under Attack, gen. eds. Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice
(Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2003), 169.
16. See the discussion of false Christs in Chapter 2.
17. Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 6.5.2.
18. "Lightning," Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, eds. Leland Ryken,
James C. Wilhoit, and Tremper Longman III (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1998), 512-513.
19. Daniel is called "son of man" once (Dan. 8:17).
20. Ice, "Preterist 'Time Texts,'" The End Times Controversy, 88.
21. Ron Rhodes and Norman L. Geisler, Conviction without
Compromise: Standing Strong in the Core Beliefs of the Christian Faith
(Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2008), 330. Emphasis in original.
22. Israel IP Warren, The Parousia: A Critical Study of the Scripture
Doctrines of Christ's Second Coming; His Reign as King; the Resurrection
of the Dead; and the General Judgment, 2nd ed. (Portland, ME: Hoyt, Fogg
& Donham, [1879] 1884), 30.
23. See "'Parousia' Means 'Presence'": https://goo.gl/N8WU2a
 EIGHT

Gathering of Eagles, Sun, Moon, Stars, Powers of

Heavens Shaken

MATTHEW 24:28
"WHEREVER THE CORPSE IS, THERE
THE EAGLES WILL GATHER."

Being familiar with the Hebrew Scriptures, Jesus' disciples would have
understood exactly what He was describing when He mentioned a corpse
and vultures (or eagles). Consider the language of Deuteronomy 28:49-53:

"Your carcasses will be food to all birds of the sky and to the beasts
of the earth, and there will be no one to frighten them away... The Lord
will bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as
the eagle swoops down, a nation whose language you shall not
understand, a nation of fierce countenance who will have no respect
for the old, nor show favor to the young.... Then you shall eat the
offspring of your own body, the flesh of your sons and of your
daughters whom the Lord your God has given you, during the siege
and the distress by which your enemy will oppress you."

They would have recognized the words of Jeremiah that described a

judgment of those who violate God's covenant: "The dead bodies of this
people will be food for the birds of the sky and for the beasts of the earth"
(Jer. 7:33). And stated later in Jeremiah, "[God] will cause them to fall by
the sword before their enemies and by the hand of those who seek their life;
and I will give over their carcasses as food for the birds of the sky and the
beasts of the earth" (19:7). A similar image of judgment is found in Job
39:26-30:

Is it at your command that the eagle mounts up and makes his nest on
high? On the cliff he dwells and lodges, upon the rocky crag, an
inaccessible place. From there he spies out food; his eyes see it from
afar. His young ones also suck up blood; and where the slain are, there
is he.

Notice the similarities between what Jeremiah and Jesus did in relation to
the temple and its eventual destruction. God told Jeremiah to "stand in the
gate of the LORD'S house" and proclaim God's Word to the people (Jer. 7:2).
Compare this with Matthew 23:36 and 24:1 where Jesus was preaching at
the front of the temple. In the days of Jeremiah, just as in Jesus' day, the
people were told not to trust in the temple and empty rituals (Jer. 7:4). The
temple was meaningless without obedience: "Thus says the LORD of hosts,
the God of Israel, 'Amend your ways and your deeds, and I will let you
dwell in this place'" (Jer. 7:3). Without obedience, the temple had "become
a den of robbers" (7:11; compare with Matt. 21:13). Therefore, God
rejected "the generation of His wrath" (Jer. 7:29; compare with Matt. 23:36;
24:34).
Because of its dead rituals, the Jerusalem of Jesus' day was a carcass,
food for the scavenging birds, the Roman armies. There was a literal
fulfillment of this prophecy when hundreds of thousands of people were
killed during the Roman siege and most likely scavenging birds feasted on
the dead flesh. (The historian Josephus noted that there were more than a
million deaths.) Even the temple area was not spared. The Idumean and
Zealot revolt left thousands slaughtered in and around the sanctuary. A
single carcass would have rendered the city and temple area "unclean," and
according to Numbers 19:11-22, anyone touching the corpse of a human
being was unclean and must be cut off from Israel. As our High Priest,
Jesus could no longer remain in the city because of its defilement. It had to
be burned with fire for purification.
On the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Jesus to point out the
temple buildings, and Jesus condemned the temple as spiritually empty and
defiled, fit only for destruction. But He promised that just as certainly as He
would destroy that temple, He would raise up another perfect temple in
three days — the temple of His body (John 2:19-21), not a temple of stone
(cf. Eph. 2:1-2; 1 Peter 2:4-12) and by extension a temple of believers (Eph.
2:19-21; 1 Cor. 3:16-17; 1 Pet. 2:4-5).

MATTHEW 24:29
"IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE TRIBULATION OF
THOSE DAYS THE SUN WILL BE DARKENED, AND
THE MOON WILL NOT GIVE ITS LIGHT, AND THE
STARS WILL FALL FROM HEAVEN, AND THE POWERS
OF THE HEAVENS WILL BE SHAKEN."

At this point some commentators separate the prophetic events of AD 70 in

verses 4-28 from what they say is the distant future coming of Christ that
follows. Everything up to 24:29, so the theory goes, refers to the events
leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, while the events from
24:29 and following refer to a yet future coming of Christ.
D. A. Carson takes the position that the events of 24:1-28 refer to "the
coming of the Son of man in the events of A.D. 70" but that "the celestial
signs and the coming of the Son of man do not immediately follow 'the
abomination that causes desolation' but 'the distress of those days' — i.e., of
the entire interadvent period of thlipsis [tribulation]." This means he has
placed a gap of time of indeterminate length between verses 28 and 29 that
is still ongoing.
He comes to this conclusion even though he argues that "'This
generation' (see 11:16; 12:41-42; 23:36; cf. 10:23; 16:28) can only with the
greatest difficulty be made to mean anything other than the generation
living when Jesus spoke."1 It's important to see that verse 29 begins with,
"But immediately after the tribulation of those days." Whatever verse 29
means, it follows "immediately after" the tribulation described in the
previous verses. "'Immediately' does not usually make room for much of a
time gap — certainly not a gap of over 2000 years."2 Matthew uses
"immediately" to mean without delay (Matt. 3:16; 4:20, 22; 8:3; 13:5, 20;
14:22; 20:34; 21:12; 26:74). We should expect the word to have the same
meaning in 24:29.
Jesus' disciples did not inquire about the end of the world (kosmos), but
about the end of that covenant age (aion). When the tribulation of "those
days" was completed, the religious and political structure of Israel as a
covenant nation came to an end before that first-century generation passed
away. Even futurists do not see Matthew 24:29 as being a description of the
end of the world, since a thousand-year earthly millennium is said to follow
immediately after their future version of the Great Tribulation with a
renovated heaven and earth to follow.
But when in the first century did the sun and moon go dark and stars fall
from heaven? Ron Rhodes and Norman Geisler state that "there are no
records of astronomical events occurring in A.D. 70, such as stars falling
from heaven and the heavens being shaken (Matthew 24:29) — signs that
Jesus promised would occur in the last days."3 What records do they have in
mind? Let's take what they claim and apply it to similar language used
elsewhere in the Bible. To be strictly literal, in the case of Matthew 24:29,
it would mean that stars will fall from heaven.4 But where do they "fall" to?
If they simply fall out of their orbit, there is no way they could have been
seen by anyone in AD 70. The light from the nearest star is light years
away. "Falling" must be a metaphor. Revelation 6:13 says that "the stars of
the sky fell to the earth." How is this possible when the size of a star is
many times larger than the earth? A single star hitting the earth would
vaporize it.
Then there's Revelation 12:3. John F. Walvoord quotes E.W Bullinger
approvingly: "It is impossible for us to take this as symbolical [Rev. 12:3];
or as other than what it literally says. The difficulties of the symbolical
interpretation are insuperable, while no difficulties whatever attend the
literal interpretation."5 No difficulties whatever? A seemingly plausible
explanation for Walvoord is that the "stars" are meteorites.
If Jesus is describing a meteor shower, then I can't see how this would be
a significant sign today since there have been many of them over the past
2000 years. In the famous Leonid meteor shower of 1833, one estimate is
that more than one hundred thousand meteors an hour passed by earth.
There have been many meteor showers throughout history.6 If they are
meteorites in Revelation 6:13 and 12:4, then they are meteorites in Matthew
24:29. Even "a third of the meteorites of heaven" falling to the earth would
have a devastating effect on our planet. The earth would cease to exist.
Scientists have speculated that a single meteorite threw up enough debris
upon impact with Earth that it "ended the reign of the dinosaurs... The
colossal energy released in its collision with Earth is now estimated to be
equal to the detonation of up to 300 million hydrogen bombs, each some 70
times bigger than the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima."7
Thomas Ice claims that the "stars" of Matthew 24:29 can mean "falling
stars" or meteorites: "Stars do literally fall from heaven. They are called
'falling stars,' 'shooting stars,' 'comets,' or 'meteors.' The Greek word for
'star' in Matthew 24:29 can be used in this way."8 But there is a problem
with this interpretation. Linked with sun and moon, it's unlikely that
meteorites are in view in Matthew 24:29 considering that the first use of
sun, moon, and stars refers to fixed stars (Gen. 1:14-16; Deut. 4:19; Ps.
136:8) and not meteorites. The same is true in Genesis 37:9-10. The eleven
stars that bow before Joseph are not meteorites. The use of stars in Matthew
24:29 cannot mean meteorites.
The biblical approach is to follow the Bible's own interpretive
methodology of how sun, moon, and stars apply to the temporal judgment
of nations (Isa. 13:10-13; 24:19-23; 34:4; Ezek. 32:6-8; Joel 2:10, 30-31;
3:15-16; Hab. 3:6-11). In none of these passages is the destruction of the
earth in view even though destructive cosmic language is used.9 Consider
the following comment from the great Puritan commentator John Owen:

Not to hold you too long upon what is so plain and evident, you may
take it for a rule, that, in the denunciations of the judgments of God,
through all the prophets, heaven, sun, moon, stars, and the like
appearing beauties and glories of the aspectable [seen] heavens, are
taken for governments, governors, dominions in political states, as Isa.
14:1215; Jer 15:9, 51:25. Isaiah 13:13; Ps. 68:6; Joel 2:10; Rev. 8:12;
Matt. 24:29; Luke 21:25; Isa 60:20; Obad. 4; Rev 8:13; 11:12; 20:11.10

Tim LaHaye admits that sun, moon, and stars are often used symbolically,
namely, for nations and political systems. The symbolic interpretation is
confirmed for us when Joseph had a dream in which he saw "the sun and
the moon and eleven stars" bowing down to him (Gen. 37:9). Joseph related
the dream "to his father and to his brothers; and his father rebuked him and
said to him, 'What is this dream that you have had? Shall I and your mother
and your brothers actually come to bow ourselves down before you to the
ground?'" (37:10). They understood that the sun, moon, and stars
represented them, representatives of the nation Israel, not actual stars.
LaHaye writes that the image of the sun, moon, and eleven stars of
Genesis 37:9 and the "woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her
feet," and having "on her head a crown of twelve stars" (Rev. 12:1) "is a
reference to the nation of Israel."11 Even a dispensationalist like LaHaye
understands that the stellar imagery is symbolic:

These objects are light-conveying objects: The moon is a reflector, the

 sun, a source of light. They are symbolic of Israel as God's light-
bearer to humankind. This Israel was in Old Testament days, for God
intended her to propagate His message from the Holy Land to the
entire world. Unfaithful in the dissemination of this message, the
nation of Israel fell under the judgment of God.12

Here is something on which Tim LaHaye and I can agree. When used in
these passages, the sun, moon, and stars "are symbolic of Israel." If they are
symbolic of Israel in Genesis 37:9 and Revelation 12:1, then why doesn't
the same hold true for Matthew 24:29? When Israel is faithful, the sun is
shining, the moon is giving off its reflective light, and the stars are
positioned high and bright in the heavens. "In Ecclesiastes 12:1, 2, we find
that the expression 'while the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be
not darkened' is used to symbolize good times. Consequently, the reverse
— an expression about the sun, moon, and stars being darkened — would
symbolize 'evil days,' days of trouble."13
Since Jesus' prophecy in Matthew 24 deals with Israel's judgment, the
sun and moon are dark and the stars fall. Like other prophecy writers, I
believe the image is symbolic of Israel's impending judgment that took
place in AD 70. The Old Testament — the only Scriptures the disciples had
at hand to interpret Jesus' words — is filled with symbols of the darkening
of sun and moon and the falling of stars. In each case, the images clearly
indicate the fall of nations. Let's first look at a passage concerning the
destruction of Babylon by the Medes and Persians, which is a past event.
Notice how Isaiah opens chapter 13: "The oracle concerning Babylon which
Isaiah the son of Amoz saw":

Behold, the day of the LORD is coming,

Cruel, with fury and burning anger,
To make the land a desolation;
And He will exterminate its sinners from it.
For the stars of heaven and their constellations
Will not flash forth their light;
The sun will be dark when it rises,
And the moon will not shed its light (Isa. 13:9-10).

Isaiah describes this event as the "day of the LORD." It's a local event: "To
make the land a desolation." During the course of the judgment nothing
happens to the sun, moon, and stars. Similar language is used to describe
the destruction of Egypt:

And when I extinguish you,

I will cover the heavens and darken their stars;
I will cover the sun with a cloud
And the moon will not give its light.
All the shining lights in the heavens
I will darken over you
And will set darkness on your land . . .
When I make the land of Egypt a desolation
(Ezek. 32:7-8, 15).

And all the host of heaven will wear away,

And the sky will be rolled up like a scroll;
All their hosts will also wither away
As a leaf withers from the vine,
Or as one withers from the fig tree (Isa. 34:4).

Notice what immediately follows: "For My sword is satiated in heaven,

behold it shall descend for judgment upon Edom, and upon the people
whom I have devoted to destruction" (Isa. 34:5). God is describing the
judgment on Edom, not the actual dissolution of the cosmos.
Using similar language in Matthew 24:29, Jesus told His disciples that a
time would come before their generation passed away of divine judgment
against Israel. By letting Scripture interpret Scripture, we are not left to
speculate what Jesus meant to say: Israel would be judged before the
generation to whom He was speaking passed away. In the book of Acts we
read Peter quoting the prophet Joel:

"And I will grant wonders in the sky above and signs on the earth
below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke. The sun will be turned
into darkness and the moon into blood, before the great and glorious
day of the Lord shall come. And it shall be that everyone who calls on
the name of the Lord will be saved" (Acts 2:19-21; Joel 2:28-32).

It's obvious that this prophecy is not predicting that the moon will
physically turn to blood (even though that's what it says) or that there will
be a so-called blood moon that looks red. James Jordan gets to the heart of
the meaning of the moon turning to blood in the passage from Joel and
quoted by Peter:

[T]he turning of the moon to "blood" points, I believe, to something

particularly Jewish: the sacrificial system. If they will not accept the
blood of Jesus Christ, the final Sacrifice, then they themselves will be
turned into blood. They will become the sacrifices... That is what the
destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 was all about.
But Joel is issuing a warning. Those who listen can escape. "And it
will come about that whoever calls on the name of Yahweh will be
delivered; for 'on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be those who
escape,' as Yahweh has said, even among the survivors whom Yahweh
calls" (Joel 2:32). Just as Isaac escaped death on Mount Zion because
of the substitute ram that God provided (Genesis 22:14), so those who
trust in the Lamb of God will escape the destruction of Jerusalem in
AD 70. Such is Joel's warning, reiterated by Peter on the day of
Pentecost [Acts 2:19-21].

Stellar language referring to the fall and judgment on Jerusalem is common

in the Bible. In Jeremiah 15:5 we read about a judgment upon Jerusalem
described as "her sun has set while it was yet day" (v. 9). Jesus' disciples
did not understand Him to mean that the universe would collapse around
them. "Anyone familiar with the Hebrew scriptures would recognize
immediately that what Jesus says about the sun, moon, and stars is not to be
taken to refer to the physical cosmos but to the political cosmos."14
James M. Hamilton writes, "the opening of the seals in Revelation 6
corresponds to what Jesus describes in the Olivet Discourse in the Synoptic
Gospels."15 If the Olivet Discourse is describing events leading up to and
including the destruction of Jerusalem that took place within a generation,
in AD 70, then Revelation must be given a similar interpretation. Even if
it's not, and refers to events in the seven-year period after the "rapture of the
church," as dispensationalists claim, there is no way that falling stars should
be interpreted as physical stars that hit the earth.
In Revelation 6:13-14, we read, "the stars of the sky fell to the earth, as a
fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind. The sky was split
apart like a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island were
moved out of their places." This passage is a partial citation from Isaiah
34:4 using the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, the
Septuagint (LXX), which reads, "all the stars shall fall."16
If this is a description of physical stars, there would be an immediate end
to the earth, and yet we find the earth still intact in Revelation 8:10 where
"a great star fell from heaven." If one star hit the earth, the earth would be
vaporized in an instant. In fact, if a star were even to get close to the earth,
the earth would burn up before it hit. How could the earth survive if a "third
of the stars of heaven" had been thrown down to the earth (Rev. 12:4)?
Then there's the description of the male goat in Daniel 8:10 that causes
"stars to fall to the earth," an action that would destroy the earth if Daniel
was describing actual physical stars. These fallen stars are then "trampled"
by the horn of a goat. It must have been a mighty big goat horn, similar in
size to the giant woman in Revelation who was "clothed with the sun,"
stood on the moon, and had a "crown of twelve stars" on her head (Rev.
12:1). Most likely the horn refers to a civil ruler and the stars represent civil
or religious authorities17 under the ruler's dominion.
Jesus is using language that was understood by the people of His day.
The Hebrew Scriptures were filled with similar symbolic language. As has
already been pointed out, there is dramatic end-of-the-world language in
Zephaniah that is directed at Jerusalem and Israel (Zeph. 1). John Lightfoot
makes the point that seemingly end-of-the-world language is a common
feature in the Bible and most often points to the end of the social, religious,
and political status of a nation:

The opening of the sixth Seal [in Rev. 6:12-13] shows the destruction
itself in those borrowed terms that the Scripture uses to express it by,
namely as if it were the destruction of the whole world: as Matt. 24:29-
30. The Sun darkened, the Stars falling, the Heaven departing and the
Earth dissolved, and that conclusion [of] ver. 16 [in Rev. 6]. They shall
say to the rocks fall on us, &c. doth not only warrant, but even enforce
us to understand and construe these things in the sense that we do: for
Christ applies these very words to the very same thing (Luke 23:30).
And here is another, and, to me, a very satisfactory reason, why to
place the showing of these visions to John, and his writing of this
Book [of Revelation] before the desolation of Jerusalem.18

When was this judgment to take place? Jesus had His present audience in
view as He made His way to the cross:

"Daughters of Jerusalem, stop weeping for Me, but weep for

yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming
when they will say, 'Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never
 bore, and the breasts that never nursed' [Matt. 24:19; Luke 21:23].
Then they will begin TO SAY TO THE MOUNTAINS, 'FALL ON US,' AND TO
THE HILLS, 'COVER US.' For if they do these things when the tree is green,
what will happen when it is dry?" (Luke 23:28-31).

Powers of the Heavens Shaken

What's true of sun, moon, and stars,19 representing the nation of Israel, is
also true of "the powers of the heavens [that] will be shaken." With this
type of language, "God is redrawing the map of world politics, and the
familiar structures of international affairs will never be the same again."20
The power structures of the Old Covenant were about to pass away and the
existing political order. This power struggle begins when Jesus was brought
before the religious and secular powers of the day and the people chose
Barabbas and Caesar over Jesus (Matt. 27:16-21; John 19:15). This
confrontation continues in the book of Acts. Peter and John are arrested
(Acts 4:3). Stephen is stoned to death (7:54-60). Paul and his compatriots
are accused of "upset[ting] the world" and "acting contrary to the decrees of
Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus'" (Acts 17:6-7). The book of
Acts ends with Paul "peaching the kingdom of God, and teaching
concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, with all openness, unhindered" (28:31;
also v. 23 and 20:25).
We can gain an understanding of what this shaking means by following
the Bible, particularly Haggai 2:6-7 and Hebrews 12:22-24. The writer of
Hebrews explains, first, by telling his first readers, "you have come to
Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and
to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn
who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits
of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant,
and to the sprinkled blood, which speaks better than the blood of Abel"
(12:22-24).
There is no longer any need for earthly Mount Zion or the city of
Jerusalem as redemptive centers (Gal. 4:21-31). These first Christians (first
fruits) — new creatures in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17) — had come to "the
heavenly Jerusalem" and were at that moment "enrolled in heaven" (cf.
Eph. 1:20; 2:6) where that Jerusalem will never be attacked or its temple
dismantled because "the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb are its
temple" (Rev. 21:22). The same is true of the sun and moon. "And the city
has no need of the sun or of the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God
has illumined it, and its lamp is the Lamb" (21:23). Theirs is a "new
covenant" (Heb. 8:7-13) based on the heavenly Jerusalem (City of Peace)
where there is perpetual peace:

Ye have come to Mount Zion — Mount Zion being opposed to Sinai,

the tangible mountain, is no mountain on earth, but is the heavenly
Mount Zion; as the Jerusalem mentioned in the subsequent clause is
the heavenly Jerusalem... This is the city which Abraham expected,
and 'of which the builder and ruler is God.' It is called, Gal. iv. 26.
'Jerusalem, which is above,' and, Rev. iii. 12. 'New Jerusalem, which
cometh down out of heaven from God, and, Rev, xxi. 2. 'The holy city,
New Jerusalem.'21

Second, this new covenant came about when God "promised, saying, 'YET
ONCE MORE I WILL SHAKE NOT ONLY THE EARTH, BUT ALSO THE HEAVEN' [Hag.
2:6-7]. This expression, 'Yet once more,' denotes the removing of those
things which can be shaken, as of created things, so that those things which
cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, since we receive a kingdom
which cannot be shaken, let us show gratitude, by which we may offer to
God an acceptable service with reverence and awe; for our God is a
consuming fire" (12:26-29). The first shaking took place at Sinai.

The voice of Jehovah, from mount Sinai, had been attended with
tremendous earthquakes and convulsions: but of ages after that
transaction, in an express prediction of the Messiah, God had foretold
that he would "once more shake the earth and the heavens also"; (Note,
Hag. 2:6-9) meaning that he would unhinge the whole civil and
ecclesiastical state of the Jews and abolish the Mosaic dispensation, in
order to make way for the kingdom of Christ. The expression "once
more," as referring to the change in the state of the church and the
world, which took place by the introduction of the Mosaic
dispensation, with the extraordinary events attending that change; and
to all other subsequent convulsions of the nation; and looking forward
to the still more extraordinary changes to be introduced at the coming
of the Messiah, denoted the total removal of the things shaken, as "of
things made," and constituted after the manner of this lower creation to
endure, but for a time (Notes, Matt. 24:29-35; Mark 13:24-31; Acts
2:1421). This "shaking," however, was to be only "once more," and
then a constitution would be introduced of a heavenly nature, which
 could not be shaken or "removed," but should continue to the end, and,
in its effects, forever. As, therefore, those who had embraced the
gospel were admitted into "a kingdom which could not be removed";
as others were invited to accept of this benefit, according to the
dispensation which was now openly introduced; and as all grace was
freely promised to everyone who sought it in the appointed way.22

The created things of temple, animal sacrifices, and a sinful priesthood

were part of a temporary covenant that was designed to pass away with the
coming of Jesus who "tabernacled among us" (John 1:14). We have now
received "a kingdom which cannot be shaken" because it's made of
permanent things. Those who contend that all the temporary things of the
Old Covenant will one day be reestablished contradict what the Bible
explicitly states. They claim that during the thousand-year period
mentioned in Revelation 20 that there will be a new temple that includes
animal sacrifices and circumcision of its worshipers. These impermanent
elements were shaken by the redemptive work of Jesus and are an affront to
the gospel.
Not only does dispensationalism require circumcision for Jews during the
millennium, but also for Gentiles who want to enter the fourth (or is it the
fifth?) temple (Ezek. 40-48). In Tim LaHaye's Prophecy Study Bible we
read what dispensationalists claim will take place during the thousand years
even though Revelation 20 doesn't mention any of them: "No foreigner who
is uncircumcised in heart and flesh may enter [the temple], neither will any
descendants of the Levites conduct services, other than the godly
descendants of Zadok."23 In addition to circumcision of Jews and non-Jews,
dispensationalism requires that animal sacrifices for atonement must also be
reinstituted.
John C. Whitcomb, in his article on "The Millennial Temple" in
LaHaye's Prophecy Study Bible, writes that "five different offerings in
Ezekiel (43:13-46:15), four of them with bloodletting, will serve God's
purposes. These offerings are not voluntary but obligatory; God will 'accept'
people on the basis of these animal sacrifices (43:27), which make
reconciliation [atonement] for the house of Israel (45:17, cf. 45:15)."24
Whitcomb attempts to mollify the problems associated with this unbiblical
view by claiming that "the offerings will not take away sin (see Heb. 10:4),
but they will be effective in sanctifying Israelites ceremonially because of
His infinitely holy presence in their midst."25 There is no biblical support
for this interpretation. "By this we have been sanctified through the offering
of the body of Jesus Christ once for all," and "having offered one sacrifice
for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God... For by one
offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified" (Heb.
10:10, 12, 14).
This is an impossible interpretation for at least three reasons. First, these
sacrifices are said to be "for atonement" (reconciliation) (Ezek. 45:15, 17),
not, as Whitcomb claims, "as effective vehicles of divine instruction for
Israel and the nations during the Millennial Kingdom."26 Second, Jesus is
the once-for-all sacrifice whose blood forever cleanses us from sin (Heb.
7:26-27; 8:13; 9:11-15; 10:5-22; 1 Peter 3:18). Third, sanctification comes
by "the washing of water with the word" (Eph. 5:26) ,not by the washing of
blood from sacrifices.

1. D. A. Carson, "Matthew," Expositor's Bible Commentary, gen. ed.

Frank E. Gaebelein, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), 8:507.
2. Paul T. Butler, The Gospel of Luke (Joplin, MO: College Press,
1981), 485. Quoted in William R. Kimball, What the Bible Says About the
Great Tribulation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985), 155.
3. Ron Rhodes and Norman L. Geisler, Conviction Without
Compromise: Standing Strong in the Core Beliefs of the Christian Faith
(Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2008), 330.
4. "'And the stars in the sky fell to the earth, as late figs drop from a fig
tree when shaken by a strong wind' (Rev. 6:13). This verse indicates that
meteors will fall to the ground and hit as hard, unripe things." Tim LaHaye,
Revelation Unveiled, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1999), 147.
5. E.W. Bullinger, The Apocalypse (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode,
1902), 274. Emphasis added. Quoted in John W. Walvoord, The Revelation
of Jesus Christ (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1966), 137.
6. http://leonid.arc.nasa.gov/history.html
7. William J. Broad, "New Clue to Cosmic Collision and Demise of
the Dinosaurs," New York Times (September 17, 1993), A8.
8. Ice, "The Olivet Discourse," The End Times Controversy, 192.
9. George Eldon Ladd, Jesus and the Kingdom: The Eschatology of
Biblical Realism (New York: Harper & Row, 1964), chap. 2.
10. John Owen, "Shaking and Translating of Heaven and Earth" (April
19, 1649), The Works of John Owen (New York: Robert Carter and
Brothers, 1851), 8:255.
11. LaHaye, Revelation Unveiled, 198.
12. LaHaye, Revelation Unveiled, 198., emphasis added. Also, see
LaHaye, Prophecy Study Bible, 47, note on Genesis 37:6-11, and 1383, note
on Revelation 12:1-5.
13. Ralph E. Woodrow, Great Prophecies of the Bible (Riverside, CA:
Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association, 1971), 81.
14. James B. Jordan, "Jesus's first Eschatological Discourse (13),"
Studies in The Revelation, No. 31 (July 1998), 1.
15. Hamilton, An Interview with Dr. James Hamilton. For further
discussion of this point, see James M. Hamilton, Jr., Revelation: The Spirit
Speaks to the Churches (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2012), 166-167. Also,
Louis A. Vos, The Synoptic Traditions in the Apocalypse (Kampen,
Netherlands: J.H. Kok N. V., 1965), 181-188.
16. J. Richard Middleton, A New Heaven and a New Earth:
Reclaiming Biblical eschatology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic,
2014), 179-210.
17. James B. Jordan, The Handwriting on the Wall: A Commentary on
the Book of Daniel, 2nd ed. (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision Press,
2007), 426-436.
18. John Lightfoot, The Whole Works of the Rev. John Lightfoot
Containing "The Harmony, Chronicle and Order of the New Testament" ed.
John Rogers Pitman, 13 vols. (London: [1655] 1823), 3:337.
19. "Only a pitiful prosiness could imagine that Jesus meant an actual
dropping of the stars upon the earth." D. Lamont, Christ and the World of
Thought (Edinburgh, 1934), 266. Quoted in R. T. France, The Gospel of
Mark: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
2002), 533, note 11.
20. France, The Gospel of Mark, 533.
21. James MacKnight, A New Literal Translation, From the Original
Greek, of All the Apostolical Epistles, rev. ed. (London: Thomas Tegg,
1843), 675.
22. Thomas Scott, The Holy Bible Containing the Old and New
Testaments, 6 vols. (Boston: Crocker and Brewster, 1855), 555-556. John
Lightfoot writes: "In the verse before [Rev. 21:2], he sees 'a new heaven
and a new earth;' and in this verse, a 'new Jerusalem.' Something parallel to
which is that in Isa. Ixv. 17; 'Behold, I create new heavens and a new earth.'
And, in the verse next following, "Behold, I create Jerusalem a rejoicing.'
The expressions intimate the great change of affairs, that should be in the
world under the gospel, from what had been before. A 'new heaven,' or a
change of church and religion, from a Jewish to a Gentile church, and from
Mosaic to evangelical religion: a 'new earth,' or a change in the world, as to
the management or rule of it, from heathenism to Christianity, and from the
rule of the four heathen monarchies [Dan. 7], 'to the saints,' or Christians,
'to judge the world' [1 Cor. 6:2]; or being rulers or magistrates in it. And the
'new Jerusalem' is the emblem and epitome of all these things under this
change, as the 'old Jerusalem' had been, before the change came." The
Whole Works of the Rev. John Lightfoot, ed. John Roberts Pitman, 13 vols.
(London: J.F. Dove, 1872), 7:113.
23. Tim LaHaye, gen. ed., Prophecy Study Bible (Chattanooga, TN:
AMG Publishers, 2000), 886, comments on Ezekiel 44:5-15.
24. John C. Whitcomb, "The Millennial Temple," Prophecy Study
Bible, 883.
25. Whitcomb, "The Millennial Temple," 883.
26. Whitcomb, "The Millennial Temple," 883.
 NINE

Coming of the Son of Man, Fig Tree, Gathering of

the Elect

MATTHEW 24:30
"THEN THE SIGN OF THE SON OF MAN WILL
APPEAR IN HEAVEN, AND THEN ALL THE TRIBES
OF THE LAND WILL MOURN, AND THEY WILL SEE
THE SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF
HEAVEN WITH POWER AND GREAT GLORY."

This verse is often interpreted to mean the physical second coming of Jesus
to earth to set up a "millennial kingdom" in Jerusalem where another temple
will be built, animals sacrificed, and circumcision required for entry.
Anyone reading Matthew 24 can plainly see that none of these events and
conditions is mentioned, and yet they are believed by millions of Christians
to be prophetic fact. The Olivet Discourse is about events surrounding the
destruction of the temple and the judgment on Jerusalem that took place in
AD 70.
We must remember, however, that Matthew 24:30, like all the other
verses we have discussed, is governed by the time text of Matthew 24:34:
"This generation will not pass away until all these things take place."
Matthew 24:30, which describes the Son of Man coming on the clouds of
heaven, continues Jesus' discussion with His disciples about events that
would take place before their generation passed away. Throughout the
Bible, God showed Himself by the presence of clouds, even though He was
not physically present (Ex. 13:21; 14:24; 19:9; 20:21; 24:15; 33:9; 34:5; 1
Kings 8:12). In addition, the Bible refers to clouds as a symbol of God's
judgment: the "day of the LORD ... will be a day of clouds ... a time of doom
for the nations" (Ezek. 30:3), "a day of clouds and thick darkness" (Joel
2:1-2). "In whirlwind and storm is His way, and clouds are the dust beneath
His feet" (Nah. 1:3), and "Behold, the LORD is riding on a swift cloud, and
is about to come to Egypt" (Isa. 19:1; see also Ps. 104:3-4).
Notice that the "idols will tremble at His presence." Was God physically
present or was His power manifested and the Egyptians knew it was God
judging them? Does God ride through the desert and "the highest heavens"
and make "clouds His chariot" where "He walks upon the wings of the
wind" (Ps. 68:4, 33; 104:3)? This type of language is typical for describing
God's power and authority. Coming on clouds, therefore, is not necessarily
an indicator that the physical presence of God is required or indicated.
In a similar way, Jesus refers to clouds to describe a specific kind of
coming related to His ascension and enthronement in heaven. Tim La-Haye
and most other prophecy writers agree that Jesus is quoting directly from
Daniel 7:13.'

I kept looking in the night visions,

And behold, with the clouds of heaven
One like a Son of Man was coming,
And He came [ἐρχόμενς] up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.

While LaHaye writes that Daniel 7:13 reveals "that Christ will come from
heaven to the earth," this is not what the text says. The Ancient of Days is
enthroned in heaven, not on earth or in the "sky" (Dan. 7:9). Daniel 7:13 is
quoted again, along with a portion of Psalm 110:1, when Caiaphas the high
priest asks Jesus if He is "the Christ, the Son of God" (Matt. 26:63). Jesus
says to him, "You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, from now
on2 you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power, and
coming on the clouds of heaven" (Matt. 26:64; see Heb. 8:1-2). Nothing is
mentioned, as LaHaye insists, about Jesus returning to earth "with the
'clouds of heaven' to be worshiped."3 LaHaye claims to interpret the Bible
literally. How can his interpretation be accurate if he misses what Daniel
7:13 states?
R.T. France makes the following relevant points in his exposition of
Matthew 26:64 and the similar language used in 24:30:
 Coming on the clouds of heaven (together with the phrase "the Son of
man") is a clear allusion to Daniel 7:13, already similarly alluded to in
24:30... We have seen that its natural application in terms of its Old
Testament source is to the vindication and enthronement of the Son of
man in heaven, not to a descent to earth. It is therefore in this verse a
parallel expression to "seated at the right hand of Power" [26:64]; the
two phrases refer to the same exalted state, not to two successive
situations or events. In this verse the appropriateness of this
interpretation is underlined by the fact that this is to be true "from now
on" (hereafter is a quite misleading rendering of the more specific
phrase ap'arti, which, as in 23:39 and 26:29, denotes a new period
beginning from now). Indeed it is something which Jesus' inquisitors
themselves will see (an echo of Zc. 12:10, as in 24:30?), for it will
quickly become apparent in the events of even the next few weeks (not
to mention the subsequent growth of the church) that the "blasphemer"
they thought they had disposed of is in fact now in the position of
supreme authority.4

N.T. Wright offers a similar interpretation in his exposition of Matthew

26:64 that also references Daniel 7:13: "The Daniel text ... has nothing to do
with a figure 'coming' from heaven to earth. Despite the widespread opinion
that this is what it 'must' mean in the gospels, there is no reason to suppose
that on the lips of Jesus, or in the understanding of the earliest traditions, it
meant anything other than vindication." Anyone familiar with Old
Testament language would have understood what Jesus was saying. Jesus'
enemies certainly did.
Wright continues be explain that the passage "speaks of exaltation: of
one who, representing 'the people of the saints of the most high', is raised
up from suffering at the hands of the beasts and given a throne to sit on,
exercising royal power... Jesus is not … suggesting that Caiaphas will
witness the end of the space-time order. Nor will he look out of the window
one day and observe a human figure flying downwards on a cloud. It is
absurd to imagine either Jesus, or Mark, or anyone in between, supposing
the words to mean that."5
It seems obvious that Jesus was speaking of His enthronement that took
place at His ascension when "He was received up into heaven and sat down
at the right hand of God" (Mark 16:19; see Ps. 110:1; Acts 2:3-6). Soon
after that event Jesus' disciples understood His redemptive mission. This is
made evident when Stephen, "being full of the Holy Spirit, ... gazed intently
into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand
of God; and he said, 'Behold, I see the heavens opened up and the Son of
Man standing at the right hand of God'" (Acts 7:55-56). How did Jesus get
there? He ascended on the clouds of heaven to the Ancient of Days. Daniel
7:13 and Psalm 110:1 were fulfilled in the first century at Jesus' ascension
(Acts 1:9-11).
Many assume that Jesus was saying that everyone on earth would see
Him physically appear in the sky. Part of this confusion stems from a poor
translation of the text. The text does not speak of Jesus appearing in the
sky. Rather, a word-for-word translation of the Greek reads, "Then will
appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven."6 (The Greek word for "sky"
and "heaven" is the same: ouranos.) The "sign of the Son of Man" is that
Jesus is in heaven (cf. Rev. 12:1).7 Jesus was telling His disciples to look
for the sign of His enthronement in heaven, not in the temple (Matt. 24:26:
"inner rooms" of the temple) or in the "wilderness" like a new Moses.
The "coming of the Son of Man" turned out to be His ascension, a direct
reference to Daniel 7:13 and Psalm 110:1. All Christians now look to "the
Jerusalem above" (Gal. 4:26; John 4:21-24; Heb. 12:22-24). That is why
Paul could write, "If you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the
things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God" (Col. 3:1).
When God raised Jesus from the dead, He "seated Him at His right hand in
the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and
dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in
the one to come" (Eph. 1:20-21). And because He was raised up to heaven,
He also "raised us up with Him" where He "seated us with Him in the
heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (2:6).
Before those in that generation passed away they would come to
understand that the earthly temple was no longer the dwelling place of God
(ultimately it never was). The destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the
desolation of the temple pointed all eyes to focus on the New Jerusalem
above. But when did "they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of
heaven with power and great glory"? (Matt. 24:30). Obviously before that
first-century generation passed away. The language is like what Jesus told
Nathanael: "'Truly, truly, I say to you, you shall see the heavens opened,
and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man'"
(John 1:51). The Greek word for "see" in John 1:51 is the same word used
in Matthew 24:30: horaō. "Although Jesus is addressing Nathanael, the
'you' to whom he promises the vision of v. 51 is plural: the vision is
probably for all the disciples, and by extension, for those also who would
follow them."8
When did Nathanael and those with him "see" what Jesus said they
would see? It's possible that they saw what Jesus described, but the event is
not recorded in Scripture. Matthew Henry, in his comments on this passage,
states the following: "There were many things which Christ did, and those
in the presence of his disciples, which were not written (John 20:30), and
why not this?"9 Therefore it's possible that at the time of Jerusalem's
judgment and the temple's destruction, the Jews saw Jesus coming on the
clouds of heaven, that is, the heavens opened and Jesus enthroned in heaven
similar to how Stephen saw Him. Since the New Testament books were
written before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70,10 there is no biblical
record of it. What we do have, however, is the promise by Jesus that they
would see it before their generation passed away.
R. T. France offers a helpful commentary on what was seen and its
relationship to "the powers of heaven":

How will this be 'seen' (ὄψονται), and by whom? If this is not the
prediction of a visible 'descent' of the Son of Man to the earth (and
nothing in the language of either Dn. 7:13-14 or this passage [Mk.
13:26] suggests that), what is being 'seen' is a heavenly authority... [T]
he heavenly enthronement is expected to have 'visible' consequences,
which in each case are expected to appear within the living generation.
See on [Mark] 9:1 for some of the suggestions which have been made
for when and how such 'seeing' might be possible. The immediate
context here offers at least two possibilities for earthly evidence that
the Son of Man is on his throne: the destruction of the temple
(expressed in the strongly 'visual' imagery of vv. 24b-25) and the
gathering of the international people of God (v. 27). These are the
negative and positive sides of the transfer of authority from the temple
to the Son of Man, from the national people of God to an international
people of God. The powerful growth of the church will provide
evidence within the living generation that the Son of man is now the
supreme authority.11

"See" can also refer to "understand." We use similar language: "I see what
you mean." Seeing as understanding is used by Jesus:

Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do

not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. In
 their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says, "YOU
WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND;
YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE; FOR
THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL, WITH
THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR, AND THEY HAVE
CLOSED THEIR EYES, OTHERWISE THEY WOULD SEE WITH
THEIR EYES, HEAR WITH THEIR EARS, AND UNDERSTAND
WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN, AND I WOULD HEAL
THEM." But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears,
because they hear (Matt. 13:13-15).

The first use of "see" refers to what is visible while the second "see" refers
to understanding. There are people "who have eyes but do not see; who
have ears but do not hear" (Jer. 5:21; also Ezek. 12:2; Isa. 6:9-10; 43:8;
Mark 4:12; 8:18; Luke 8:10; John 9:39-41; 12:40; Acts 28:26f; Rom 11:8).
The day would come when what they see with their eyes — the
dismantling of the temple, stone by stone, as Jesus predicted — will bring
the understanding that everything Jesus claimed about Himself was indeed
true and that He is enthroned in heaven. "Therefore let all the house of
Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ — this
Jesus whom you crucified" (Acts 2:36).
That generation of believers, "some of those standing here" (with Jesus)
would "not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His
kingdom" (Matt. 16:27-28). Mark renders it, "until they see the kingdom of
God after it has come with power" (9:1). Daniel's vision, repeated and
appropriated by Jesus, is all about "the transcendent power of God which
has put an end to usurping human 'powers' and has established the final,
universal sovereignty of the Son of Man. So also when the temple is
destroyed the existing οὐρανοῖς σαλευθήσονται [heavens will be shaken]
(v. 25), while by contrast the newly established 'power and glory' of the Son
of Man will be there for all to see."12
Whatever ultimately is to be seen, "These sayings are not predictions of
some event in the indefinite and probably distant future. All relate to the
contemporary generation, ... all would be within the lifetime of at least
some of those standing there."13

Every Eye Will See Him

What about Revelation 1:7 which states, "BEHOLD, HE IS COMING
WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him,14 even those who
pierced Him; and all the tribes of the land will mourn over Him"? The fact
that "those who pierced Him" would see this event take place, we must
conclude that what was revealed to John was about events in his day. The
people who pierced Jesus are long dead. John wrote that Zechariah 12:1015
had been fulfilled at the crucifixion: "And again another Scripture says,
'THEY SHALL LOOK ON HIM WHOM THEY PIERCED'" (John 19:37).
Like we saw in Matthew 24:30, it's the "tribes of the land," that is, the tribes
of Israel, that are in view. The reader will note that Revelation begins with a
statement of what will take place "shortly" (1:1) because "the time is near"
(3:3).
Adam Clarke shows, "By this the Jewish People are most evidently
intended, and therefore the whole verse may be understood as predicting the
destruction of the Jews; and is a presumptive proof that the Apocalypse was
written before the final overthrow of the Jewish state."16 John Lightfoot
offers a similar interpretation: "The vengeance of Christ upon that nation is
described as his 'coming,' John xxi. 22; Heb. x. 37; his 'coming in the
clouds,' Rev. 1.7: 'in glory with the angels,' Matt. xxiv. 30."17
It wasn't a future generation that was guilty of the crucifixion; it was the
generation of Jesus' day (Matt. 12:41-42; 23:36; 24:34). If it had not been
for a cadre of Jewish leaders who brought Jesus before Herod (Matt. 14:1;
Luke 23:7-11) and Pilate (Matt. 27:2; Mark 15:1; Luke 23:1, 12; John
18:28-29) with false testimony (Mark 14:55-59), Jesus most likely would
not have been crucified. That's why Peter says that while Jesus was
"delivered up by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God," he
went on to testify, "you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and
put Him to death" (Acts 2:23). Peter was addressing his fellow Israelites.
They were charged with Jesus' crucifixion. The same is true when Peter
addressed "the people, the priests and the captain of the temple guard" and
their collusion with the Gentiles (Acts 4:1, 27-28).
We saw in Matthew 23, however, that it was those of that generation, and
that generation alone, that were described as "sons of those who murdered
the prophets" who would "fill up ... the measure of the guilt of [their]
fathers" (vv. 31-32), not some distant generation that had no direct hand in
the crucifixion of Jesus. It was the representatives of that generation that
pronounced a curse upon themselves and their children: "And all the people
said, 'His blood shall be on us and on our children!'" (Matt. 27:25). To top it
off, when Pilate offered to release Jesus, their true king, they shouted, "We
have no king but Caesar" (John 19:14-15).

The Tribes of the Land

Another point of confusion in the translation of Matthew 24:30 is the phrase
"all the tribes of the earth will mourn," which is more accurately translated
"all the tribes of the land will mourn." The Greek word for "earth" (gēs) is
best translated as "land" as it is in Luke 21:23: "Woe to those who are
pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days; for there will be
great distress upon the land and wrath to this people." Jesus was warning
His audience to flee Judea when they saw "Jerusalem surrounded by
armies" (Luke 21:20; also 19:44). Only those near enough to the temple
would be able to see the abomination of desolation ... standing in the holy
place" (Matt. 24:15).
The Olivet Discourse was clearly not a message to the world, but a
warning to the tribes of Israel of the first century. Jesus told the "daughters
of Jerusalem" to "weep for yourselves and for your children" (Luke 23:28-
30). France writes:

The witness of the "Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven" will
be "all the tribes of the land," who will greet his vindication not with
acclamation but with mourning. The allusion is to Zech 12:10-14:
"They will look on the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for
him." There the mourners are identified as "the house of David and the
inhabitants of Jerusalem" (v. 10), who are then listed by families (the
families of David, Nathan, Levi, Shimei, and others, vv. 12-14). That
is why the phrase [all the tribes of the land will mourn] must refer to
all the tribes of the land (i.e., as in Zech 12, a specifically Jewish
mourning), not "of the earth." This is also required by the use of phylē
[tribes], which in the NT (as normally in the LXX) is used specifically
of the OT tribes (Matt 19:28; Luke 2:36; Acts 13:21; Rom. 11:1; Heb.
7:13-14; etc.).18

Barry Horner takes a similar position on the translation of the Greek word
gēs, although he applies its fulfillment to a yet future time. "In the phrase
hai phulai tēs gēs, 'the tribes of the earth,' if tēs gēs is uniformly translated
in the NT as 'the earth,' then the absence of any mention of the land of Israel
there is virtually guaranteed. But the context suggests that Zech. 12:10, 14
is inferred by Matthew in this instance, in which case 'the tribes of the Land
[of Israel]' is a more appropriate translation."19 The tribes of Israel mourned
because they understood that judgment was a reality for them in their day as
they saw their city and temple set ablaze and the entire edifice thrown down
by the invading Roman armies. As Kenneth Gentry points out, "The word
'mourning' (Gr.: kopto) can signify either the weeping of repentance (as it
does in the prophecy to which Christ alludes, Zech 12:10) or the wailing of
lamentation."20 They were warned to embrace Jesus as their promised
Messiah, flee the city, or perish in the impending conflagration. The Jews
who rejected Jesus because He was not their idea of a political savior died
at the spear-point of Roman soldiers. Their Savior had come, and they had
crucified Him. "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put
to death by hanging Him on a cross [lit. wood]" (Acts 5:30; also 10:39;
13:29; Gal. 3:13).

MATTHEW 24:31
"HE WILL SEND FORTH HIS ANGELS WITH A
GREAT TRUMPET AND THEY WILL GATHER TOGETHER
HIS ELECT FROM THE FOUR WINDS,
FROM ONE END OF THE SKY TO THE OTHER."

Jesus had mentioned this gathering earlier: "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills
the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to
gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her
wings, and you were unwilling" (Matt. 23:37). Thomas Ice interprets this
verse to refer to a future physical gathering of elect Jews at the end of a yet-
future Great Tribulation when angels will search the globe and pluck Jews
from where they live and carry them to Israel.21
This is highly unlikely since the imagery of gathering is used throughout
the Old Testament to describe God calling His people to forsake their
wicked ways and worship Him: "And He will lift up a standard for the
nations and assemble the banished ones of Israel, and will gather the
dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth" (Isa. 11:12;22 27:12-
13). Jesus was telling His disciples that after the judgment of Jerusalem and
the destruction of the temple, His messengers (whether angelic or human)
would preach the gospel of the new covenant whereby elect Jews would be
gathered together. The passage does not say the gathering is a physical
relocation. It's possible that Jesus is referring to the remnant elect of Jews
who fled the city and survived the great tribulation. The elect Jews are
mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 24:22 and 24, indicating that they were
survivors of that generation. In 24:30 we see that it's the "tribes of the land"
that mourn. Did these mourning tribes repent and trust Jesus as Lord and
Savior?
There could be a broader meaning where Jesus' message truly goes
international. No longer is the gospel only for the "lost sheep of the house
of Israel" (Matt. 10:6; 15:24), but "that He might also gather together into
one the children of God who are scattered abroad" (John 11:52), an event
prophesied by Isaiah: "The Lord God, who gathers the dispersed of Israel,
declares, 'Yet others I will gather to them, to those already gathered'" (Isa.
56:8). Jesus may have had in mind the Jews "in the dispersion [διασπορά]"
(James 1:1; also, John 7:35; John 12:20; Acts 14:1; 17:4; 18:4; Rom 1:16; 1
Peter 1:1).

Gospel Messengers
In context, Matthew 24:31 could be describing the spread of the gospel to
the nations and their eventual discipleship (28:18-20; Acts 10-11). This
helps explain why the Greek world angelos ("angel") can be translated
"messenger" instead of supernatural beings. John the Baptist was God's
"messenger" who prepared the way for Jesus (Matt. 11:10; Mark 1:2). The
disciples of John are called "messengers" (Luke 7:24, 27). Jesus "sent
messengers on ahead of Him" (Luke 9:52). Paul was given "a thorn in the
flesh, a messenger of Satan" (2 Cor. 12:7). Rahab "received the messengers
and sent them out by another way" (James 2:25). In each of these examples,
the Greek word angelos is used. Dispensational prophecy writer Ed
Hindson recognizes this use of angelos: "The term angel (Greek, angelos)
means 'messenger.' God's angels are His divine messengers (Heb. 1:14;
Rev. 1:1), and His true prophets and preachers are called angels of the
churches (Rev. 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14)."23 R. T. France, while
acknowledging that angelos can be translated as "messenger," takes the
more traditional view that it refers to supernatural beings during the period
leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. His
following comments are based on the parallel passage in Mark 13:27:

I once argued that, since the basic meaning of [angelos] is

"messenger" (even though its NT uses are predominately in the
secondary sense of "angel"), here "the context favours strongly the
primary meaning".24 In that case v. 27 [of Mark 13] would be
 describing the work of Christian missionaries, sent out by the
enthroned Son of Man in 8:38, and in the absence of any clear
indication that the normal NT meaning of [angelos] is inappropriate
here, I now think it more likely that angels are here credited with a
"missionary" role in the ingathering of God's people; cf. the
description of angels in Heb. 1:14 as ["Are they not all ministering
spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit
salvation?"]25

The language is borrowed from the Old Testament: "If your outcasts are at
the ends of the earth, from there the LORD your God will gather you, and
from there He will bring you back" (Deut. 30:4). This is not done by a
physical transport but by the movement of God's Spirit on the heart and
mind.

The Gathering Together

In either case, whether human messengers or angels, this event took place
in that first-century generation and continues to this day. David Chilton
writes:

In context, there is every reason to assume that Jesus is speaking of the

worldwide evangelism and conversion of the nations which will follow
upon the destruction of Israel. Christ's use of the word "gather" is
significant in this regard. The word, literally, is a verb meaning "to
synagogue" [to gather]; the meaning is that with the destruction of the
Temple and of the Old Covenant system, the Lord sends out His
messengers to gather His elect people into His New Synagogue. Jesus
is actually quoting from Moses, who had promised: "If your outcasts
are at the ends of heaven, from there the LORD your God will
synagogue you, and from there he will take you" (Deut. 30:4,
Septuagint).26

Many Jews had refused to be gathered together under the New Covenant
that would be inaugurated by Jesus (Matt. 23:37-38). "Because the Old
Covenant system was 'obsolete' and 'ready to disappear' (Heb. 8:13),"
Chilton adds, "the writer to the Hebrews urged them to have hope, 'not
forsaking the synagoguing of ourselves together, as is the habit of some, but
encouraging one another; and all the more, as you see the Day approaching'
(Heb. 10:25; cf. 2 Thess. 2:1-2). The Old Testament promise that God
would 'synagogue' His people undergoes one major change in the New
Testament... What Jesus is saying, therefore, is that the destruction of the
Temple in A.D. 70 will reveal Himself as having come with clouds to
receive His Kingdom; and it will display His Church before the world as
the full, the true, the super-Synagogue made up of a gathering of believing
Jews and the nations (Eph. 2:11-22)."27

The Four Winds

The phrase "from the four winds" refers to the land of Israel, from horizon
to horizon, "from the farthest end of the land, to the farthest end of heaven"
(Mark 13:27). The phrase "the four corners of the land" is a common
expression for the four points of the compass. A similar idea is found in
Isaiah 11:11-12 on which Edward J. Young comments:

Isaiah does not intend us to understand that the earth actually has four
corners. He is merely employing a manner of speaking taken from the
idea of referring to the four corners of a garment as indicating the
entirety of the garment. Our Lord was reflecting upon this passage
when He said, "And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a
trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds,
from one end of heaven to the other" (Matt. 24:31).28

Notice that Jesus does not say that His gathered elect will be brought back
to the land of Israel as some end-time fulfillment. We know from the Olivet
Discourse that the elect were already in the land!
Those who were "separate from Christ," "excluded from the
commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise," and
"who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ"
(Eph. 2:12-13). Many in Judea rejected their Messiah and became a
"synagogue of Satan" (Rev. 2:9; 3:9). The true synagogue of God is made
up of believing Jews and non-Jews "from every nation and all tribes and
peoples and tongues" (Rev. 7:9; cf. 5:9; Acts 2:5). The land of Israel was no
longer the redemptive center of the world. Churches were planted
throughout the then-known world. It is significant that the scroll of
Revelation is delivered to each "angel" (messenger) of the seven churches
in Asia Minor. God's message of redemption had gone global in the first
century (Rom. 1:8; Col. 1:23). John Gill, a Baptist whose commentary on
the entire Bible is rich with the continuity of the Old and New Testaments
that speaks with one voice, offers a helpful summary:

The Gospel will be preached in all nations, and multitudes will be

converted, and embrace and profess the Christian religion, and join
themselves to the churches of Christ, which, in the New Testament, is
expressed by being joined to the Lord, Acts v. 13, 14, see Jer. 1.5. and
Isa. lvi. 3, 6: and shall be my people; shall appear to be so, who before
were not the people of God; did not profess themselves, and were not
known to be, the people of God, though they secretly were in the
counsel and covenant of God; but now, being called by grace, they
become openly and manifestatively his people, 1 Pet. ii. 10: and I will
dwell in the midst of thee; in the church, consisting of people of many
nations, as well as Jews: and thou shalt know that the Lord of hosts
hath sent me unto thee; to the Jews, as well as to the Gentiles.29

This ingathering is described by Paul as he quotes Isaiah's prophecy on how

the rejection of the gospel by the Jews would broaden the gospel to the
nations (Acts 28:24-28; cf. Rom. 11:12-15): "Therefore let it be known to
you that the salvation of God has been sent to the Gentiles; they will also
listen" (Acts 28:28). The word translated "Gentiles" is the Greek word
ethnoi, "nations." It was what was promised long ago in the book of Amos
(9:12-15) and noted by the first church council (Acts 15:16-18). Jesus was
to be a "A LIGHT OF REVELATION TO THE GENTILES, and the glory
of Your people Israel" (Luke 2:32; also Isa. 9:2; 42:6; 49:6, 9; 51:4; 60:1-3;
Matt. 4:16; Luke 1:79; Acts 13:47; 26:23).

With a Great Trumpet

The trumpet describes, in a symbolic way, the call of the gospel, the
announcement of the final jubilee, and the once-for-all atonement for sin:
"You shall then sound a ram's horn abroad on the tenth day of the seventh
month; on the day of atonement you shall sound a horn all through your
land" (Lev. 25:9). When Israel was in captivity, we are told that "a great
trumpet" was blown and those "who were perishing in the land of Assyria
and who were scattered in the land of Egypt will come and worship the
LORD in the holy mountain at Jerusalem" (Isa. 27:13).30 It's doubtful that
exiled Jews in these faraway places heard the ram's horn blow as they made
their way back to Israel. Rather, they heard God's inner call to return. In a
similar way, God's messengers herald the gospel "to gather together His
elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

Cry loudly, do not hold back;

Raise your voice like a trumpet,
And declare to My people their transgression
And to the house of Jacob their sins. (Isa. 58:1)

Matthew 24:31 draws upon this Old Testament imagery to symbolize the
evangelistic work about to commence, the great gathering of God's elect
from around the land of Israel and beyond its borders of the oikoumenē.

MATTHEW 24:32-33
"NOW LEARN THE PARABLE FROM THE FIG TREE:
WHEN ITS BRANCH HAS ALREADY BECOME TENDER
AND PUTS FORTH ITS LEAVES, YOU KNOW
THAT SUMMER IS NEAR; SO, YOU TOO, WHEN
YOU SEE ALL THESE THINGS, RECOGNIZE THAT
IT IS NEAR, RIGHT AT THE DOOR."

Many people interested in prophecy have been told that the "fig tree" that
"puts forth its leaves" is Israel becoming a nation again. Hal Lindsey made
this interpretation popular in his mega best seller The Late Great Planet
Earth (1970), claiming that 1948 was the beginning of the generation that
Jesus said would not pass away before He returned to "rapture" His church
40 years later. This "rapture" was to take place sometime before 1988:

The most important sign in Matthew has to be the restoration of the

Jews to the land in the rebirth of Israel. Even the figure of speech "fig
tree" has been a historic symbol of national Israel. When the Jewish
people, after nearly 2,000 years of exile, under relentless persecution,
became a nation again on 14 May 1948 the "fig tree" put forth its first
leaves. Jesus said that this would indicate that He was "at the door,"
ready to return.
Then He said, "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass
away until all these things take place" (Matthew 24:34, NASB). What
generation? Obviously, in context, the generation that would see the
signs — chief among them the rebirth of Israel. A generation in the
Bible is something like forty years. If this is a correct deduction, then
within forty years or so of 1948, all these things could take place.
 Many scholars who have studied Bible prophecy all their lives believe
that this is so.31

In an interview published in Christianity Today on April 15, 1977, seven

years after the publication of The Late Great Planet Earth and 11 years
from the 1988 date when Lindsey claimed the "rapture" most likely was to
occur, he told W. Ward Gasque:

I don't know how long a biblical generation is. Perhaps somewhere

between sixty and eighty years. The state of Israel was established in
1948. There are a lot of world leaders who are pointing to the 1980s as
being the time of some very momentous events. Perhaps it will be
then. But I feel certain that it will take place before the year 2000.

When mistaken in their claims, prophecy writers like Lindsey often keep
moving the prophetic goal posts to fit an interpretive system that must be
adjusted periodically to make up for speculative prophetic claims that don't
materialize.
In that same 1977 interview, Gasque asked Lindsey: "But what if you're
wrong" about your 1948-1988 predictive scenario? Lindsey replied: "Well,
there's just a split second's difference between a hero and a bum. I didn't ask
to be a hero, but I guess I have become one in the Christian community. So
I accept it. But if I'm wrong about this, I guess I'll become a bum." Chuck
Smith argued in a similar way:

If I understand Scripture correctly, Jesus taught us that the generation

which sees the "budding of the fig tree," the birth of the nation of
Israel, will be the generation that sees the Lord's return. I believe that
the generation of 1948 is the last generation. Since a generation of
judgment is forty years and the Tribulation period lasts seven years, I
believe the Lord could come back for His Church any time before the
Tribulation starts, which would mean any time before 1981. (1948 +
40 - 7 = 1981).32

Tim LaHaye, following Lindsey's prophetic mathematics, wrote:

[W]hen a fig tree is used symbolically in Scripture, it usually refers to

the nation Israel. If that is a valid assumption (and we believe it is),
then when Israel officially became a nation in 1948, that was the
 "sign" of Matthew 24:1-8, the beginning "birth pains" — it meant that
the "end of the age" is "near." It was as if the tree were planted in
1914-1918 when the first "birth pain" was felt, but it did not grow into
a full-blown tree capable of budding until 1948 when Israel was
granted statehood, thus fulfilling Ezekiel 37:1-8.33

LaHaye held this view in 1999. But in his Prophecy Study Bible, published
in 2000, the editors conclude that "the fig tree is not symbolic of the nation
of Israel."34 Jesus used the parable of the fig tree as an analogy. His point
was that when leaves begin to appear on a fig tree — or, for that matter, on
"all the trees" (Luke 21:29; see Judges 9:8-13; Ps. 92:12; Ezek. 17:22—23;
Hosea 9:10) — it is a sign that summer is near. In a similar way, when
Jesus' first-century audience saw certain signs, they would know that Jesus
was near, "right at the doors"35 (Matt. 24:33; James 5:9). Near to what?
Near to fulfilling the promise He made about coming within a generation to
dismantle the temple. This is the simple and clear meaning of the text. Any
other interpretation wildly stretches the Bible beyond its intended meaning.
Even dispensationalist author John Walvoord admitted as much:

Actually, while the fig tree could be an apt illustration of Israel, it is

not so used in the Bible. In Jeremiah 24:1-8, good and bad figs
illustrate Israel in the captivity, and there is also mention of figs in
29:17. The reference to the fig tree in Judges 9:10-11 is obviously not
Israel. Neither the reference in Matthew 21:18-20 nor that in Mark
11:12-14 with its interpretation in 11:20-26, gives any indication that it
is referring to Israel, any more than the mountain referred to in the
passage.36 Accordingly, while this interpretation is held by many,
there is no clear scriptural warrant.
A better interpretation is that Christ was using a natural illustration.
Because the fig tree brings forth new leaves late in the spring, the
budding of the leaves is evidence that summer is near. In a similar
way, when those living in the great tribulation see the signs predicted,
they will know that the second coming of Christ is near. The signs in
this passage, accordingly, are not the revival of Israel, but the great
tribulation.37

Like Walvoord, dispensational author Mark Hitchcock takes issue with the
often-used argument that the fig tree in Matthew 24:32 refers to Israel
becoming a nation again, a point he makes in his book The Complete Book
of Bible Prophecy?38 There are other dispensationalists who reject the
popular belief that the fig tree of Matthew 24 refers to modern-day Israel.
The following are comments from Larry D. Pettegrew, a professor of
theology at dispensational-oriented Master's Seminary: "The fig tree,
however, does not illustrate Israel becoming a nation in 1948. The fig tree
is simply an illustration from nature."39 Anyone who continues to teach that
the fig tree is Israel is not up-to-date on the literature of the subject.
If Israel is the fig tree in Matthew 24:32, then Israel is the fig tree in
Matthew 21:18-20 where Jesus says, "'No longer shall there ever be any
fruit from you.' And at once the fig tree withered."40 The fig tree of
Matthew 24 was a leaves-only tree. There is no fruit on the tree. A fruitless
tree is to be cut down (Luke 13:6-9). The tree was fruitless for three years
of Jesus' ministry. The land owner wanted to cut it down. The vineyard-
keeper asked for one more year. If it did not produce fruit the next year, it
was to be cut down.
The tree that represents spiritual Israel is the olive tree (Rom. 11:17, 24).
The olive tree sunk its roots in the first pages of Genesis (3:15) and
continued throughout the Old Testament (Heb. 11) and into the New
Testament where Gentiles were grafted into an already-rich Jewish tree
made up of believers in Jesus as the fulfillment of all the messianic
prophecies. There aren't two trees with two peoples of God. There is one
tree with one people of God (Eph. 2:11-22).

"He" or "It" is at the Doors

There's some debate over whether the text should read "it is near" (as the
AV, KJV, NIV, YLT, and other translations translate ἐγγύς ἐοτιν) or "He is
near." The Greek is not definite since the subject "he" or "it" is part of the
verb "is" (third person singular). Since "the end of the age" (24:3) is the
topic, it's possible that "it" refers to "the end of the age" being near. If Jesus
was referring to Himself, He would have said "I am near, at the doors."
In the Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges, we find the
interpretation that "the siege of Jerusalem prefigured by [the fig tree]
'parable' [in v. 32] took place at the time of harvest.... ὅτι ἐγγύς ἐοτιν [that
it is near] The harvest time of God — the end of this aon or period at the
fall of Jerusalem."41
Daniel Whedon (1808-1885) offers a similar interpretation in his
commentary on Matthew's Gospel:
 These things — The these things specified in the apostle's question,
Matthew 24:3. It is near — There is no supplied antecedent to this it.
The meaning, however, is plain. When ye see the train of calamitous
events passing successively before your eyes, know that the ruin which
is included in the train is near. At the doors — Like the Roman at the
portal of the temple.42

While the above interpretation has many adherents, when Matthew 24:33
and Mark 13:29 are compared with their parallel in Luke 21:31, we know
what was near: "So you also, when you see these things happening,
recognize that the kingdom of God is near."
Jesus was referring to the nearness of the kingdom, a message that was
preached to that generation up until the time the temple was destroyed (Acts
28:30-31). John the Baptist said, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at
hand" (Matt. 3:2). Continuing John's ministry message of repentance,
"From that time Jesus began to preach and say, 'Repent, for the kingdom of
heaven is at hand'" (4:17). Jesus told His disciples, "And as you go, preach,
saying, 'The kingdom of heaven is at hand'" (10:7). What would these first
hearers of the disciples' preaching have concluded when they heard them
say, "the kingdom of heaven is at hand"? Would they have assumed that "at
hand" did not mean "near"?
N.T. Wright's comments on the parallel passage in Mark's Gospel offer a
good summary of the issue:

It should be noted most carefully that the signs do not mean that 'he is
near', as most English translations of Mark 13.29 and its parallels
suggest. The Greek is engus estin, which can mean 'he is near' or 'she
is near', or 'it is near'. In the present context the last of these is both
natural and obvious. Luke has paraphrased, just in case (perhaps)
anyone should read Mark [or Matthew] without understanding: when
you see these things, you will know that the kingdom of God is near.
Here we are in touch, I suggest, with the final moments in Jesus'
retelling of the kingdom-story. Luke has rightly brought out the
meaning of the entire prediction. When Jerusalem is destroyed, and
Jesus' people escape from the ruin just in time, that will be YHWH
becoming king, bringing about the liberation of his true covenant
people, the true return from exile, the beginning of the new world
order.43
The debate over the nearness of the kingdom is about its nature. Prophecy
writers claim that it's mostly political, that Jesus' kingdom does not come
until He is personally reigning from Jerusalem (Rev. 20). The kingdom of
God or the kingdom of heaven is not political, although it has political
implications, but comes by way of a person's new life in Christ where they
are made into new creatures (2 Cor. 5:17).
The disciples were told to pray the following:

Thy kingdom come.

Thy will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven (Matt. 6:10).

God's kingdom is an outward expression of His will. God's kingdom comes

when God's will is done in every area of life. There is nothing in the Lord's
Prayer (actually, the disciples' prayer) that states that Jesus must be
physically present on earth for God's kingdom to come since His throne is
in heaven and the earth His footstool. Consider the following:

Therefore [Jesus] having been exalted to the right hand of God, and
having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has
poured forth this which you both see and hear. For it was not David
who ascended into heaven, but He himself says, "The Lord said to my
Lord, 'Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies a footstool for
your feet.' [Ps. 110:1; Matt. 22:4345; 26:63-64; Heb. 1:13]. Therefore
let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both
Lord and Messiah — this Jesus, whom you executed on a tree!" (Acts
2:33-36).

When Jesus was raised from the dead, He was seated at God's right hand "in
the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and
dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in
the one to come. And He put all things in submission under His feet, and
gave Him head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness
of Him who fills all in all" (Eph. 1:20-23). Does this sound like the
postponement of God's kingdom?
Let's look at another Matthew-Luke parallel that can shed some light on
the best way to interpret Mathew 24:33. In Matthew's Gospel we find the
following:
 For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with
His angels, and WILL THEN REPAY EVERY MAN ACCORDING
TO HIS DEEDS. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are
standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man
coming in His kingdom (16:27-28).

Here's Luke's version:

For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, the Son of Man will be

ashamed of him when He comes in His glory, and the glory of the
Father and of the holy angels. But I say to you truthfully, there are
some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the
kingdom of God (9:26-27).44

They both mention the "kingdom of God" but Matthew links it to the
coming of the Son of Man. And when will this happen? It was near for
them, before all of those of that generation passed away. How do we know
this? Because Jesus aid, "there are some of those who are standing here
who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His
kingdom." Some of Jesus' disciples would still be alive when the kingdom
of God comes. Adam Clarke comments:

The destruction of Jerusalem, and the Jewish economy, which our

Lord here predicts, took place about forty-three years after this: and
some of the persons now with him doubtless survived that period, and
witnessed the extension of the Messiah's kingdom; and our Lord told
them these things before, that when they came to pass they might be
confirmed in the faith, and expect an exact fulfillment of all the other
promises and prophecies which concerned the extension and support
of the kingdom of Christ.45

This event had to be far enough in the future that most would have died
but not so far that everyone of that generation had died (John 21:18-23).
The events leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in AD
70 fit the context and time parameters.

1. Tim LaHaye, gen. ed., Prophecy Study Bible (Chattanooga, TN:

AMG Press, 2000), 1040, note on Matthew 24:29-31.
2. Some translations have "hereafter," but this is incorrect. See
William Carey Taylor, The New Bible: Pro and Con (New York: Vantage
Press, 1955), 89-90.
3. LaHaye and Jenkins, Are We Living in the End Times?, 225.
4. R. T. France, Matthew: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries
(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1985), 381.
5. N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis, MN:
Fortress Press, 1996), 524-525. It's possible that Caiaphas could have
witnessed Jesus' ascension "on the clouds of heaven" since it happened
before "the men of Galilee" and was visible to anyone who cared to see
(Acts 1:2, 9-11; Luke 24:51-52).
6. The use of the singular "heaven" is not an indication that "sky" is
the better translation. Matthew uses the singular "heaven" for God's
dwelling place in several places (e.g., Matt. 5:34; 6:10, 20; 11:25; 14:19;
16:1; 18:18; 21:25; 22:30; 23:22; 28:2).
7. R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew: The New International
Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007),
925-926.
8. D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1991), 163.
9. http://biblebrowser.com/john/1-51.htm
10. "Indeed, it is becoming an increasingly persuasive argument that
all the New Testament books were written before 70 A.D. — within a single
generation of the death of Christ." John Ankerberg and John Weldon,
Ready With An Answer: For the Tough Questions About God (Eugene, OR:
Harvest House Publishers, 1997), 364-365. Reprinted as Handbook of
Biblical Evidences (2008). "Most liberal scholars are being forced to
consider earlier dates for the New Testament. Dr. John A.T. Robinson, no
conservative himself, comes to some startling conclusions in his
groundbreaking book Redating the New Testament. His research has led to
his conviction that the whole of the New Testament was written before the
fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (Robinson, RNT)." Josh McDowell, Evidence
for Christian
11. R.T. France, The Gospel of Mark: The New International Greek
Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 535. In a
footnote, France cites G. B. Caird: "in the teaching of Jesus 'the coming of
the Son of Man on the clouds of heaven was never conceived as a primitive
form of space travel, but as a symbol for the mighty reversal of fortunes
within history and at the national level' (Jesus [And the Jewish Nation],
20)." 535, note 17. Caird's article can be found at https://goo.gl/s8Qm4c
12. France, The Gospel of Mark, 535.
13. France, The Gospel of Mark, 344-345.
14. Similar language is found in Isaiah 40:5: "Then the glory of the
LORD will be revealed, and all flesh will see it together; for the mouth of
the LORD has spoken." This prophecy was fulfilled in the ministry of John
the Baptist and the ministry of Jesus (see vv. 3-4 and compare with Matt.
3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4-6; John 1:23), and yet it says "all flesh will see it
together." Did everyone in the whole wide world see Jesus? (Matt. 2:3;
8:34; 10:22; Mark 1:5; 9:23; Luke 2:1).
15. Gary DeMar, The Gog and Magog End-Time Alliance: Israel,
Russia, and Syria in Bible Prophecy (Powder Springs, GA: American
Vision Press, 2016), chaps. 9 and 10.
16. Adam Clarke, The New Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ (Nashville: Abingdon Press, [1810]), 6:971.)
17. John Lightfoot, Commentary on the New Testament from the
Talmud and Hebraica: Matthew — 1 Corinthians, 4 vols. (Peabody, MA:
Hendrickson Publishers, [1859] 1989), 2:422.
18. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 925.
19. Barry Horner, Future Israel: Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must be
Challenged (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2007), 229.
20. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Olivet Discourse Made Easy (Draper,
VA: Apologetics Group, 2010), 116.
21. Told to me by Kenneth L. Gentry, who heard Ice state this
interpretation.
22. The "second time" in Isaiah 11:11 requires a first time. In 11:16 we
read that the first time was when Israel "came up out of the land of Egypt."
The second time was when they returned from their post-exile captivity.
23. Ed Hindson, "False Christs, False Prophets, Great Deception,"
Foreshadows of Wrath and Redemption, William T. James, ed. (Eugene,
OR: Harvest House, 1999), 33.
24. France, Jesus and the Old Testament, 238, "with references to
others such as R. A. Knox and P. Carrington who have adopted the same
interpretation" (France, The Gospel of Mark, 536, note 24).
25. France, The Gospel of Mark, 536-537.
26. David Chilton, Paradise Restored: A Biblical Theology of
Dominion (Tyler, TX: Dominion Press, [1984] 1995), 104.
27. Chilton, Paradise Restored, 104-105.
28. Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah, 3 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1965), 1:396-397.
29. John Gill, An Exposition of the Books of the Prophets
(Streamwood, IL: Primitive Baptist Library, 1979), 2:686.
30. "The Great Trumpet is a figure of speech for assembling troops
(Ex. 19:16, 19; 1 Sam. 13:3; 2 Sam. 6:15; Matt. 24:31; 1 Cor. 15:52; 1
Thess. 4:16)." Note on Isaiah 27:13 in The Nelson Study Bible (Nashville:
Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997), 1153.
31. Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth (Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 1970), 5354.
32. Chuck Smith, EndTimes (Costa Mesa, CA The Word for Today,
1978), 35.
33. Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, Are We Living in the End Times?: Current
updated and expanded ed. (Carol
Events Foretold in Scripture ... And What They Mean,
Stream, IL Tyndale House, [1999] 2011), 57.
34. LaHaye, Prophecy Study Bible, 1040, note on Matthew 24:32—33.
35. The word is plural in the original. Could Jesus be referring to "the
doors of the temple"? (1 Kings 6:31-33; 2 Chron. 28:24; 29:3, 7) The
temple doors were made out of "olive wood."
36. Walvoord is clearly wrong about this. First-century Israel is the
object of Jesus' judgment discourse in Matthew 21:18-20 and Mark 11:12—
14. See Gary DeMar, "Fruitless Trees and the Nation of Israel," Last Days
Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church (Atlanta, GA: American
Vision, 1994), 303-310.
37. John F. Walvoord, Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come (Chicago, IL:
Moody, [1974] 1980), 191—92.
38. Mark Hitchcock, The Complete Book of Bible Prophecy (Wheaton,
IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1999), 158.
 39. Larry D. Pettegrew, "Interpretive Flaws in the Olivet Discourse,"
The Master's Seminary Journal 13/2 (Fall 2002), 173—190.
40. "The fig tree does not necessarily indicate Israel here (see 21:18-
22; Luke 21:29)." The Nelson Study Bible, 1622. Note on Matthew 24:32.
41. Arthur Carr, The Gospel According to St. Matthew, rev. ed.
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1902), 272.
42. Commentary on the Gospels Matthew and Mark: Intended for
Popular Use (Carlton & Porter, 1860).
43. N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis: Fortress
Press, 1996), 364.
44. Mark adds "come with power" (9:1; see Acts 1:8; 2:1-21).
45. Adam Clarke, "Matthew," The Holy Bible Containing the Old and
New Testaments, 6 vols. (Cincinnati: Applegate and Co, 1856), 3:165.
 TEN

"This Generation" Not "That Generation"

MATTHEW 24:34
"TRULY I SAY TO YOU, THIS GENERATION
WILL NOT PASS AWAY UNTIL ALL THESE
THINGS TAKE PLACE."

As with Matthew 23:36 and related passages, "this generation" in 24:34 and
the parallel passages in Mark 13 and Luke 21 refers to the generation of
Jesus' day. Following this biblical evidence, most Bible commentators have
interpreted "this generation" in this way, understanding that all the signs in
the Olivet Discourse referred to events leading up to and including the
destruction of Jerusalem that took place in AD 70. To show that my
interpretation of "this generation" is neither new nor unusual, I've listed a
diverse group of Bible expositors who hold the same view:

• Clement of Alexandria (150-215): "[Jesus] confidently set forth,

plainly as I said before, sufferings, places, appointed times, manners,
limits. Accordingly, therefore, prophesying concerning the temple, He
said: 'See ye these buildings? Verily I say to you, There shall not be
left here one stone upon another which shall not be taken away [Matt.
24:3]; and this generation shall not pass until the destruction begin
[Matt. 24:34]... ' And in like manner He spoke in plain words the
things that were straightway to happen, which we can now see with
our eyes, in order that the accomplishment might be among those to
whom the word was spoken." (Clementine Homilia, 3:15)

• Chrysostom (375): "But of wars in Jerusalem is He speaking; for it is

not surely of those without, and everywhere in the world; for what did
they care for these? And besides, He would thus say nothing new, if
He were speaking of the calamities of the world at large, which are
happening always. For before this, were wars, and tumults, and
fightings; but He speaks of the Jewish wars coming upon them at no
great distance, for henceforth the Roman arms were a matter of
anxiety. Since then these things also were sufficient to confound them,
He foretells them all. Therefore He saith, they shall come not by
themselves or at once, but with signs. For that the Jews may not say,
that they who then believed were the authors of these evils, therefore
hath He told them also of the cause of their coming upon them. 'For
verily I say unto you,' He said before, 'all these things shall come upon
this generation,' having made mention of the stain of blood on them."
(Homilies)

• Eusebius Pamphilius (c. 265—339): "It is fitting to add to these

accounts the true prediction of our Savior in which he foretold these
very events. His words are as follows: 'Woe unto them that are with
child, and to them that give suck in those days! But pray ye that your
flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day; For there shall
be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world
to this time, no, nor ever shall be' [Matt. 24:19-21]. The historian
[Josephus], reckoning the whole number of the slain, says that eleven
hundred thousand persons perished by famine and sword, and that the
rest of the rioters and robbers, being betrayed by each other after the
taking of the city, were slain.... These things took place in this manner
in the second year of the reign of Vespasian, in accordance with the
prophecies of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who by divine power
saw them beforehand as if they were already present, and wept and
mourned according to the statement of the holy evangelists, who give
the very words which he uttered, when, as if addressing Jerusalem
herself, he said: 'If thou hadst known, even thou, in this day, the things
which belong unto thy peace! But now they are hid from thine eyes.
For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a
rampart about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every
side, and shall lay thee and thy children even with the ground' [Luke
19:42-44]. And then, as if speaking concerning the people, he says,
'For there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this
people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led
away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of
the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" [21:23-24].
And again: 'When ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then
know that the desolation thereof is nigh' [21:20]. If anyone compares
the words of our Savior with the other accounts of the historian
[Josephus] concerning the whole war, how can one fail to wonder, and
to admit that the foreknowledge and the prophecy of our Savior were
truly divine and marvelously strange."1

• Henry Hammond (1653): "I now assure you, that in the age of some
that are now alive, shall all that has been said in this chapter [Matt. 24]
be certainly fulfilled."2

• John Lightfoot (1658): "Hence it appears plain enough, that the

foregoing verses [Matt. 24:1-34] are not to be understood of the last
judgment, but, as we said, of the destruction of Jerusalem. There were
some among the disciples (particularly John), who lived to see these
things come to pass. With Matt. xvi. 28, compare John xxi. 22. And
there were some Rabbins alive at the time when Christ spoke these
things, that lived until the city was destroyed."3

• Jonathan Edwards (1735): "'Tis evident that when Christ speaks of

his coming; his being revealed; his coming in his Kingdom; or his
Kingdom's coming; He has respect to his appearing in those great
works of his Power Justice and Grace, which should be in the
Destruction of Jerusalem [in AD 70] and other extraordinary
Providences which should attend it."4
"The degree of their punishment, is the uttermost degree. This may
respect both a national and personal punishment. If we take it as a
national punishment, a little after the time when the epistle was
written, wrath came upon the nation of the Jews to the uttermost, in
their terrible destruction by the Romans; when, as Christ said, 'was
great tribulation, such as never was since the beginning of the world to
that time,' Mat. 24:21. That nation had before suffered many of the
fruits of divine wrath for their sins; but this was beyond all, this was
their highest degree of punishment as a nation."5

• Philip Doddridge (1750): "And verily I say unto you; and urge you to
observe it, as absolutely necessary in order to understand what I have
been saying, That this generation of men now living shall not pass
away until all these things be fulfilled, for what I have foretold
concerning the destruction of the Jewish state is so near at hand, that
some of you shall live to see it all accomplished with a dreadful
exactness."6

• Thomas Newton (1755): "It is to me a wonder how any man can refer
part of the foregoing discourse to the destruction of Jerusalem, and
part to the end of the world, or any other distant event, when it is said
so positively here in the conclusion, All these things shall be fulfilled
in this generation." 7

• John Gill (1766): "This is a full and clear proof, that not anything that
is said before [v. 34], relates to the second coming of Christ, the day of
judgment, and the end of the world; but that all belongs to the coming
of the son of man in the destruction of Jerusalem, and to the end of the
Jewish state."8

• Thomas Scott (1817): "In general [Jesus] assured them, that the
approach of them would be as certainly determined, as the approach of
summer was by the budding of the fig-tree; and that they would all be
accomplished, before that generation had passed away. This absolutely
restricts our primary interpretation of the prophecy to the destruction
of Jerusalem, which took place within forty years."9

• David Brown (1853): "Our Lord decides the sense of his own words,
when he says of this entire prophecy, almost immediately after the
words quoted, 'Verily I say unto you, THIS GENERATION SHALL
NOT PASS AWAY TILL ALL THESE THINGS BE FULFILLED.'
— (Matt. xxiv. 34). Does not this tell us plainly as words could do it,
that the whole prophecy was meant to apply to the destruction of
Jerusalem? There is but one way of setting this aside, but how forced it
is, must, I think, appear to every unbiased mind. It is by translating,
not 'this generation (ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη), but 'this nation shall not pass
away': in other words, the Jewish nation shall survive all the things
here predicted!10 Nothing but some fancied necessity, arising out of
their view of the prophecy, could have led so many sensible men to put
this gloss upon our Lord's words. Only try the effect of it upon the
perfectly parallel announcement in the previous chapter: 'Fill ye up
then the measure of your fathers... Wherefore, behold, I send you
prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill
and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues,
and persecute from city to city: that upon you may come all the
righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel
unto the blood of Zecharias, whom ye slew between the temple and the
altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this
generation (ἐπὶ τὴν γενεὰν ταύτην, Matt. xxiii. 23:32, 34-36). Does
not the Lord here mean the then existing generation of the Israelites?
Beyond all question he does; and if so, what can be plainer than that
this is his meaning in the passage before us?"11

• Patrick Fairbairn (1856): "[Translating genea as 'race'] is a very

forced explanation; and not a single example can be produced of an
entirely similar use of the word. Whatever difficulties may hang
around the interpretation of that part of Christ's discourse, it is
impossible to understand by the generation that was not to pass away
anything but the existing race of men living at the time when the word
was spoken.12

• Self Interpreting Bible (1853): "This generation shall not pass till all
these things be fulfilled. The subjunction of this statement immediately
after the prophecy by three evangelists (see Mark 13.30; Luke 21. 25),
puts the idea of any dislocation of the narrative totally out of the
question. Nor is it possible, upon any Scripture authority, to interpret
'this generation of the Jewish nation, or the Christian church, in
continuance. Wherefore, the conclusion seems inevitable, that the
previous prophecy describes directly the destruction of Jerusalem and
the Jewish state, even should that be considered typical of other and
greater events."

• Henry Cowles (1881): "Some interpreters have construed the words

— 'this generation' — to mean this sort of people, i.e., the Jews, or the
wicked, etc., seeking to set aside its only legitimate sense, viz., the
men then living. Such wresting of Christ's words cannot be reprobated
too severely."13

• Milton Terry (1898): "Is it not strange that any careful student of our
Lord's teaching should fail to understand his answer to this very
question? The disciples asked, definitely, WHEN shall it be [Matt.
24:3]? And Jesus proceeded to foretell a variety of things which they
would live to see — all preliminary to the end. He foretold the horrors
of the siege of Jerusalem, and an intelligible sign by which they might
know the imminence of the final catastrophe of Judaism. And having
told them of all these things, and of his own coming in the clouds and
its glorious significance, he added: 'When ye see these things coming
to pass, know that it is nigh, at the door. Verily I say unto you, this
generation shall not pass away until all these things be accomplished.'
The ruin of the temple was, accordingly, the crisis which marked the
end of the pre-Messianic age."14

• John Broadus (1886): "This generation, as in [Matt.] 23:36, also

11:16 12:41f.; and compare Luke 17:25 with 21:32. The word cannot
have any other meaning here than the obvious one. The attempts to
establish for it the sense of race or nation have failed. There are some
examples in which it might have such a meaning, but none in which it
must, for in every case the recognized meaning will answer, and so
another sense is not admissible. (Comp. on 3:6) Some of the Fathers
took it to mean the generation of believers, i. e., the Christians, etc.,
after the loose manner of interpreting into which many of them so
often fell. We now commonly make the rough estimate of three
generations to a century. The year in which our Lord said this was
most probably A.D. 30, and if so, it was forty years to the destruction
of Jerusalem. The thought is thus the same as in 16:28; and comp.
John 21:22f. Till all these things be fulfilled, or, more exactly, take
place, 'come to pass,' see on 5:18. The emphasis is on 'all.' All the
things predicted in v. 4-31 would occur before or in immediate
connection with the destruction of Jerusalem."15

• G. R. Beasley-Murray (1957): "Despite all the attempts to establish

the contrary, there seems to be no escape from the admission that here
[in Mark 13:30] ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη is to be taken in its natural sense of the
generation contemporary with Jesus."16
• Robert G. Bratcher and Eugene A. Nida (1961): "[T]he obvious
meaning of the words 'this generation' is the people contemporary with
Jesus. Nothing can be gained by trying to take the word in any sense
other than its normal one: in Mark (elsewhere in 8:12, 9:19) the word
always has this meaning."17

• William L. Lane (1974): "The significance of the temporal reference

has been debated, but in Mark 'this generation' clearly designates the
contemporaries of Jesus (see on Chs. 8:12, 38; 9:19) and there is no
consideration from the context which lends support to any other
proposal. Jesus solemnly affirms that the generation contemporary
with his disciples will witness the fulfillment of his prophetic word,
culminating in the destruction of Jerusalem and the dismantling of the
Temple."18

• Jack P. Lewis (1976): "There is a distinction between genos (race)

and genea (generation). Others have argued that genea means the final
generation; that is, once the signs have started, all these happenings
would transpire in one generation (cf. 23:36). But elsewhere in
Matthew genea means the people alive at one time and usually at the
time of Jesus (1:17; 11:16; 12:39,41,45; 23:36; Mark 8:38; Luke
11:50f.; 17:25), and it doubtlessly means the same here."19

• D. A. Carson (1984): "[This generation] can only with the greatest

difficulty be made to mean anything other than the generation living
when Jesus spoke."20

• William Sanford LaSor (1987): "If 'this generation' is taken literally,

all of the predictions were to take place within the life-span of those
living at that time."21

• New Bible Commentary: "Christ's use of the words 'immediately

after' [in Matthew 24:30] does not leave room for a long delay (2,000
years or more before his literal second coming occurs), neither does
the explicit time-scale given in Matthew 24:34. The word 'parousia'
does not occur in this section but is prominently reintroduced in the
new paragraph which begins at Matthew 24:36, where its unknown
time is contrasted with the clear statement that the events of this
paragraph will take place within 'this generation" (Matthew 24:36).
This section is therefore in direct continuity with what has gone
before, the account of the siege of Jerusalem. Here we reach its
climax." (P. 936) "The language ... is drawn from Daniel 7:13—14,
which points to the vindication and enthronement of Jesus (rather than
his second coming ['parousia']). ... In this context, therefore, this poetic
language appropriately refers to the great changes which were about to
take place in the world, when Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed.
It speaks of the 'Son of Man' entering into his kingship, and 'his angels'
gathering in his new people from all the earth. The fall of the temple is
thus presented, in highly allusive language, as the end of the old order,
to be replaced by the new regime of Jesus, the Son of Man, and the
international growth of his church, the new people of God... The NIV
margin offers 'race' as an alternative to 'generation.' This suggestion is
prompted more by embarrassment on the part of those who think
Matthew 24:30 refers to the 'parousia' (second coming) rather than by
any natural sense of the word 'genea'!"22

• F. F. Bruce (1983): "The phrase 'this generation' is found too often on

Jesus' lips in this literal sense for us to suppose that it suddenly takes
on a different meaning in the saying we are now examining. Moreover,
if the generation of the end-time had been intended, 'that generation'
would have been a more natural way of referring to it than 'this
generation.23

• John Nolland (2005): "Matthew uses genea here for the tenth time.
Though his use of the term has a range of emphases, it consistently
refers to (the time span of) a single human generation. All the
alternative senses proposed here [in 24:34] (the Jewish people;
humanity; the generation of the end-time signs; wicked people) are
artificial and based on the need to protect Jesus from error. 'This
generation' is the generation of Jesus' contemporaries."24

• R. T. France (2007): "'This generation' has been used frequently in

this gospel for Jesus' contemporaries, especially in a context of God's
impending judgment; see 11:16; 12:39, 41—42, 45; 16:4; 17:17, and
especially 23:36, where God's judgment on 'this generation' leads up to
Jesus' first prediction of the devastation of the temple in 23:38. It may
safely be concluded that if it had not been for the embarrassment
caused by supposing that Jesus was here talking about his parousia, no
 one would have thought of suggesting any other meaning for 'this
generation,' such as 'the Jewish race' or 'human beings in general' or
'all the generations of Judaism that reject him' or even 'this kind'
(meaning scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees). Such broad senses, even
if they were lexically possible, would offer no help in response to the
disciples' question 'When?'"25

• Paul Copan (2008): "In these passages, the 'coming' (the Greek verb
is erchomai = '[I] come') is expected within Jesus' own 'adulterous and
sinful generation.' Something dramatic will apparently take place in
the near future."26

• Grant R. Osborne (2010): "'[T]his generation' (ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη) in the

gospels always means the people of Jesus' own time (11:16; 12:41-42;
23:36) not, as some have proposed, the generation of the last days in
history, the Jewish people, the human race in general, or the sinful
people."27

Even with all the above evidence, there are still those who try their best to
circumvent what is obvious to first readers of Matthew 24 and well-studied
commentators and scholars. Consider the following comments on Matthew
24:34 by Henry M. Morris, a dispensationalist and a founding father of the
modern-day six day creationist movement, found in his creationist themed
Defender's Study Bible which was first published in 1995:

The word "this" is the demonstrative adjective and could better be

translated "that generation." That is, the generation which sees all
these signs (probably starting with World War I) shall not have
completely passed away until all these things have taken place"
(1045).

"This" or "That"?
Morris describes the use of "this" as a "demonstrative adjective," but it is
better designated as a "near demonstrative" adjective identifying what
generation will see the signs in the lead-up to the destruction of the temple
that took place in AD 70. "This" refers to what is near in time or space, for
example, "this day" as opposed to "that day." In Greek and English, the
near demonstrative (this) is contrasted with the distant demonstrative (that).
Prior to his comments in his Defender's Study Bible, Morris wrote the
following extended comments on Matthew 24:34 in his book Creation and
the Second Coming:

In this striking prophecy, the words "this generation" has the emphasis
of "that generation." That is, that generation — the one that sees the
specific signs of His coming — will not completely pass away until He
has returned to reign as King.28 Now if the first sign was, as we have
surmised, the first World War, then followed by all His other signs,
His coming must indeed be very near29 — even at the doors! There are
only a few people still living from that30 generation. I myself was born
just a month before the Armistice was signed on November 11, 1918.
Those who were old enough really to know about that First World War
— "the beginning of sorrows" — would be at least in their eighties
now. Thus, we cannot be dogmatic, we could very well now be living
in the very last days before the return of the Lord."31

Audience Relevance
Matthew 24:33 tells us what audience Jesus had in view: "so, you too, when
you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door." It's
obvious, and without any need for debate, that the first "you" refers to those
who asked the questions that led to Jesus' extended remarks (Matt. 24:2-4).
Jesus identifies those who will "see all these things" by using "you."
Thomas A. Howe spends a chapter in his book What the Bible Really
Says: Breaking the Apocalypse Code, trying to convince his readers that it's
possible that Jesus' use of "this generation" does not necessarily have to
refer to the generation to whom Jesus was speaking. His argument comes
down to the audience referent in Matthew 24:33. Is the meaning of Jesus'
use of "you" in this verse the same as the use of "you" throughout Matthew
24, or could it mean a different "you," a future "you"? Here's the way Howe
argues his case:

One of these likely indicators [that Jesus' use of "you"] is the prior
statement of Jesus: "when you see all these things, recognize that He is
near, right at the door" (Matt. 24:33). This statement seems to indicate
that the referent of the word 'generation' is the ones who see all these
things. This, of course, raises the question, "To what 'things' is Jesus
referring?"32
This is the second time Howe cites Matthew 24:33 in his nearly 200-page
book, and he misquotes it. Here's the full passage, and note that "you" is
used twice: "so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize [lit.
know] that He is near, right at the door." Why would Howe not include the
first "you" in his citation of the verse? Because he would have to explain
why the two uses of "you" are being used by Jesus to refer to different
audiences separated by nearly two thousand years.
There is no debate over the meaning or "referent," a term Howe uses
frequently, of the first "you." The first "you," which he does not mention,
refers to Jesus' present audience. Howe claims the second "you" refers to a
different audience, a supposed audience that "sees all these things," which
he argues is a future audience. Notice Howe's equivocation: "this statement
seems to indicate…. "He knows he can't say dogmatically, "this statement
indicates" because it's not self-evident to the reader that Jesus is referring to
two different audiences separated by nearly two thousand years.
Who does Jesus say will see "all these things"? Certainly not a future
audience. "So, you too, when you see all these things." The first "you" is
obviously Jesus' present audience as is the second "you." No one reading
Matthew 24:33 could conceive that either use of "you" by Jesus refers to an
audience different from the audience to whom Jesus was addressing. There
is a third use of the second-person plural in verse 33. The Greek word
ginōskete is also a second-person plural and means "you know" or "you
recognize."
If Jesus had a future generation in mind, He could have eliminated all
confusion by saying, "even so they too, when they see all these things, they
will recognize that He is near, right at the door. Truly I say to you, that
generation will not pass away until all these things take place."33 Of course,
that's not what the verses say. So instead of sticking with the verses as they
are written, Henry Morris, Thomas A. Howe, and others must manipulate
them to support a view that projects the audience into the distant future
while obscuring the plain meaning of the texts.34
The use of "this" confirms that the only generation in view is the one in
Jesus' day. As Greek grammar books point out, the near demonstrative
"this" is always used in the New Testament to describe what is near in
terms of time, place, and distance:

The demonstrative[s] . . . are of two kinds: near [this/these] and distant

[that/those]. The near demonstratives, as the name denotes, points to
someone or something "near," in close proximity. They appear as the
 singular word "this" and its plural "these." The distant demonstratives,
as their name suggests, appear as "that" (singular), or "those"
(plural).35

We can follow the way Matthew uses the near demonstrative "this"
throughout his gospel to see that he has his present audience in view and
not one in the distant future: "this way" (6:9), "this day" (6:11), "this
fellow" (9:3), "this news" (9:26), "this city" (10:23), "this place" (12:6),
"this man" (13:56), "this people" (15:8); "this rock" (15:18), "this desolate
place" (15:33), "this little child" (18:4), "this mountain" (21:21), "this
stone" (21:44), "this image" (22:20), "this gospel" (24:14), "this generation"
(24:34), "this woman" (26:13), "this night" (26:31). "This" refers to what's
near.
If Jesus had wanted to identify a future generation, He could have chosen
the adjective that to distinguish the generation to whom He was speaking
from a future generation (e.g., Matt. 7:22 ["that day" is in the future]; 8:12
["that place" refers to the place of judgment distant from our place and
time]; 10:19 ["that hour" refers to a future time]; 24:10 ["and at that time"
refers to a future time but within the time parameters of "this generation"];
24:36 ["that day and hour" refers to a future day and hour that was near the
end of their generation (1 John 2:18; Heb. 10:25), not their present day and
hour]; 26:29 ["that day" refers to a time when Jesus is in the kingdom, a
future time]).
Curiously, Howe spends a great deal of time on the meaning of genea and
how it is used by Jesus in Matthew 24:34, but he does not mention the
significance of the near demonstrative "this."36 The texts that govern the
timing of the Olivet prophecy — Matthew 23:36 and Matthew 24:34 —
make it clear that Jesus was speaking of the events leading up to and
including the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. If we abandon these clear time
statements, then these signs can be applied to any generation. As history
attests, this is exactly what's happened. There have always been wars, false
prophets, famines, tribulation, lawlessness, and persecution. If people fail to
recognize the timing of these events set by Scripture and the historical
context of Jesus' words, they will always be led astray by those who keep
insisting that it's our generation that will experience the end times.

"This Generation," "This Race," or "This Nation"?

One popular way of getting around the biblical meaning of "this generation"
is to claim that Jesus was saying "this race," that is, "this Jewish race will
not pass away until all these things take place." The most popular source for
genea ("generation") to be translated as "race" is found in the Scofield
Reference Bible. The following is the note on Matthew 24:34 found in the
1967 edition of The New Scofield Reference Bible:

The word "generation" (Gk. genea), though commonly used in

Scripture of those living at one time, could not here mean those alive
at the time of Christ, as none of "these things" — i.e. The world-wide
preaching of the kingdom, the tribulation, the return of the Lord in
visible glory, and the regathering of the elect — occurred then. The
expression "this generation" here (1) may mean that the future
generation which will endure the tribulation and see the signs, will also
see the consummation, the return of the Lord; or (2) it may be used in
the sense of race or family, meaning that the nation or family of Israel
will be preserved 'till all these things be fulfilled,' a promise
wonderfully fulfilled today.37

The note in this edition has been changed from the original that stated "the
primary definition [of 'genea'] ... is 'race, kind, family, stock, breed'" and
that "all lexicons" agree. As we'll see below, "all lexicons" do not agree that
the use of genea in Matthew 24:34 should be translated as "race." Scofield
continued in his note by arguing "[t]hat the word is used in this sense
because none of 'these things,' i.e. the world-wide preaching of the
kingdom, the great tribulation, the return of the Lord in visible glory, and
the regathering of the elect, occurred at the destruction of Jerusalem by
Titus, A.D. 70. The promise is, therefore, that the generation — nation, or
family of Israel — will be preserved unto 'these things'; a promise
wonderfully fulfilled to this day."38 Not only was Scofield wrong about the
proper translation of genea, but he was also wrong about the signs that he
claims were not fulfilled before AD 70.
First, as noted, genea can't be translated as "race" because it's the wrong
Greek word. If Jesus wanted to refer to the Jewish race, He would have
used genos. Genea is always translated "generation" in the New Testament
(Matt. 1:17; 11:16; 12:39, 41, 42, 45; 16:4; 17:17; 23:36; 24:34; Mark 8:12,
38; 9:19; 13:30; Luke 1:48, 50; 7:31; 9:41; 11:29, 30, 31, 32, 50, 51;17.25;
18:8; 21:32). Genos is used to signify "race," "family," "birth," "offspring"
in several passages (Mark 7:26; Acts 7:19 [family]; 13:26 [family]; 18:24
[birth]; 2 Cor. 11:26 [countrymen]; Gal. 1:14; Phil. 3:5 [offspring]; 1 Peter
2:9). "It seems unlikely that all three evangelists would have failed to use
this word if this was the idea they meant to convey."39
Second, turning "generation" into "race" makes no logical sense. Jesus
would have been arguing that when all the things He just outlined took
place, the Jewish race would pass away. Even many dispensationalists
understand the problem translating genea as "race."40 Try using "race"
where "generation" appears elsewhere in Matthew's gospel beginning with
Matthew 1:17. "Race" cannot be made to fit.
In volume four of Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, Michael Brown
argues that genea "normally means generation" but "can sometimes mean
race," although he does not offer any biblical evidence or examples to
support his claim. In a footnote, he admits that "this argument ... should not
be pressed too strongly since the nuance of 'race' would have been much
clearer had the Greek word genos, as opposed to genea, been used here."41
In the end, Dr. Brown has to admit that the best translation is "generation"
and not "race." It's this kind of good reasoning that has led most Bible
commentators to abandon the "race" translation.
While objecting to a past pre-AD 70 fulfillment, Brown argues that Jesus
must have had a future Jewish generation in view because "the context of
this very discourse speaks of Jewish believers living in a Jewish nation, one
that even enforces Sabbath laws."42 Jewish believers were living in a
Jewish nation (John 11:48) and the Sabbath laws were operating in the
years preceding the destruction of the temple that took place before that
generation passed away (Matt. 12:1-2; 12:10; Luke 13:14; 14:3; John 5:10;
7:23; 9:16; Acts 1:12). The first Christians were Jews living in Jerusalem
(Acts 2:5) who are addressed as "men of Judea" and "men of Israel" (2:14,
22). The first church in Jerusalem was made up exclusively of Jews (5:11;
8:1).
Third, some argue for "nation" as the translation of genea. Like the
"race" argument, this makes no linguistic sense since ethnos is the usual
word translated "nation." In fact, Jesus uses ethnos three times in Matthew
24 (vv. 7, 9, and 14). I could only find one translation that translates genea
as "nation," the idiosyncratic Lamsa translation, but only in Mark 13:30. In
Matthew 24:34, Lamsa translates the passage as "this generation."43 Like
genos, if Jesus meant "nation" He could have easily used ethnos.

The Generation that Sees These Signs

Fourth, a more recent interpretation is that "this generation" means "the
generation that sees the signs."44 In order to get this translation, "this" has
to be replaced with "the" and four words have to be added: "The generation
that sees these signs will not pass away..." One person wrote the following
to me: "I read it in the context to be saying 'this generation of which I am
speaking.'" This is not the way to interpret the Bible. The Bible can be
made to say anything if we get to add words or take away words from
Scripture. There's a verse about that as it relates to the book of Revelation
(Rev. 22:18-19). In addition, we are told in Matthew 24:33 who will see the
signs: "even so you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is
near, right at the door." The "you" are those of that generation, not a future
generation.

A Certain Type of Generation

Sixth, another popular attempt at an interpretive solution from what the text
actually states is to claim that Jesus was referring to a certain type or kind
of generation.45 Consider the following argument by Neil D. Nelson, Jr. He
claims "this generation" used by Matthew (11:16; 12:41, 42, 45; 23:36;
24:34)

reveals that the kind of people referred to are characterized as those

who reject Jesus and his messengers and the salvific message they
preach, who remain unbelieving and unrepentant, who actively oppose
Jesus and his messengers through testing and persecution, and who
will face eschatological judgment. The pejorative adjectives given to
"this generation" (evil, adulterous, faithless, perverse; cf. 12:39, 45;
16:4; 17:17) throughout the gospel are qualities that distinguish those
who are subjects of the kingdom from those who are not.... The
opponents of Jesus' disciples in Matthew 24-25 share similar traits
with 'this generation' as characterized in these... chapters.46

Robert H. Gundry also sees this as a possibility but does not argue for it.47
Of course, Jesus doesn't use the phrases "this kind of generation" or "this
type of people" in Matthew 24. Jesus does use the phrases "evil and
adulterous generation" (Matt. 12:39; 16:4), "evil generation" (12:45), and
"unbelieving and perverted generation" (Matt. 17:17) elsewhere, but the
words evil, adulterous, unbelieving, and perverted are in the texts. Even in
these cases Jesus is referring to that first-century generation, not some
undesignated future generation (Matt. 12:38-45). Matthew 23:36 and
Matthew 24:34 do not include any of the above adjectives; therefore, the
burden of proof rests with those who claim that Jesus has a "kind of people
in view" rather than the generation to whom He was speaking.
Let's look at Matthew 12:38-45 to see that Jesus had a particular
generation — their generation — in mind even when He used the adjectives
in question. The Pharisees say to Jesus, "We want to see a sign" (12:38).
Jesus answers, "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign"
(12:39). That makes their generation an evil and adulterous generation since
they were the ones asking for a sign. Jesus gave them a sign, "the sign of
Jonah the prophet" (12:39). And when was the sign of Jonah the prophet
fulfilled? In their day, and only their day: "for just as Jonah was three days
and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so shall the Son of Man be
three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (12:40).
"This generation" (12:41-42) is used by Jesus to point out how their
generation would be judged by the people of Nineveh and the Queen of the
South because someone greater than Jonah and Solomon "is here." The
"here" was in Jesus' day since only those people living in Jesus' day could
actually see the sign of the resurrection.

"The men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the

judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at the preaching
of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. The Queen
of the South will rise up with this generation at the judgment and
will condemn it, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear
the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, something greater than Solomon
is here."

The men of Nineveh and the Queen of the South will not stand up with
every generation and condemn them. It's one generation ("it") and only one
generation that will be condemned. To repeat, Jesus does not say "this kind
of generation will not pass away." He says "this generation," the same
phrase that is used in Matthew 23:36, a verse that Thomas Ice says "is an
undisputed reference to A.D. 70."48 Jesus was in the midst of their
generation the same way that Jonah and Solomon were in the midst of their
generation. No other generation fits the context given the fact that Jesus
was crucified and resurrected in their day where there were witnesses of
these events (Luke 1:1-4; 1 Cor. 15:16). Not so with any other generation.
If Jesus had wanted to extend "this generation" to refer to many
generations, He could have said "on all generations" (Luke 1:48) or
"generation after generation" (1:50), or "to all generations" (Eph. 3:21).

The Greek Verb Genetai

One last attempt to circumvent the obvious meaning of "this generation" is
to claim that the use of the Greek verb genetai49 means that the passage
should read "until all these things begin to take place." Let's plug in the
destruction of the temple as one of "these things" that will begin to take
place but will not actually take place before that generation passes away:
"This generation will not pass away until the destruction of the temple (one
of 'these things') begins to take place." The destruction of the Temple
didn't begin to be destroyed before that generation passed away; it was
destroyed. I have not found a single translation that opts for "until all these
things begin to take place." Even a futurist like Stanley Toussaint argues
against it. "This approach fails to note the significance of the words 'all
these things'… in the same verse. It could hardly be said that all these
things began to be [fulfilled] in the lifetime of the disciples. How could
Christ begin His coming at the time when it is described as being like
lightning? Nor does this explanation fit the meaning of verse thirty-three,"50
which reads "even so you too, when you see all these things, recognize that
He is near, right at the door" (Matt. 24:33). Genetai is used in Matthew
24:32 and is translated as "has already become tender."
Robert Mounce lists "begins to take place" as a possible way to
understand the timing of Matthew 24:34, although he does not accept it: "
[I]f genetai (happen) is taken as an ingressive aorist,51 the sentence would
indicate that before the generation alive at that time had died, all the things
described in connection with the end will have started to take place"52 Did
Jesus' "coming on the clouds of heaven" begin to take place in that
generation?
How about fleeing to the mountains surrounding Judea? Are they still
fleeing after nearly 2000 years later? Remember, that Jesus says, "This
generation will not pass away until all these things take place." This means
that all these things would have had to have started to take place and go on
taking place for nearly 2000 years! "In Arndt & Gingrich, it is interesting
that the extensive entry on ginomai makes no reference to genetai in
Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32, so that no specific meaning is
attributed. Even the exact form genetai is not parsed."53 None of the Greek
grammar texts (e.g., Robertson,54 Blass-Debrunner-Funk,55 Dana &
Mantey56) suggest this meaning of genetai in Matthew 24:34 (or Mark
13:30 or Luke 21:32). There is a good way to settle this issue by looking at
Matthew 24:32-33:

Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already
become [γένηται, genetai] tender and puts forth its leaves, you know
that summer is near; so, you too, when you see all these things,
recognize that He is near, right at the door.

How long do we have to wait for summer once the fig tree puts forth
leaves? There is no long drawn out process. Once the branch has become
tender, summer is near, not two thousand years in the future. In the same
way, "this generation," the generation to whom Jesus was speaking, would
not pass away until all the things He predicted would happen did happen.
There is no multi-generational delay just like there is no delay of summer
once the fig tree puts forth its leaves. In Luke's version of the Olivet
Discourse, we read, "But keep on the alert at all times, praying that you
may have strength to escape all these things that are about to take place,
and to stand before the Son of Man" (Luke 21:36). Who "may have strength
to escape all these things"? His present audience ("you"), not some future
generation. These events were "about to take place" for that generation.

How Else Could Jesus Have Said It?

When all is said and done, let's suppose those who claim that Jesus was not
referring to His first-century audience are right. This leaves us with a
question: If Jesus had wanted to specify the generation to whom He was
speaking, how would He have said it if "this generation" doesn't mean the
generation to whom He was speaking and "you" does not mean them? Does
anyone believe that those who heard Jesus thought He had some different
generation in view? I don't believe so.
The Olivet Discourse is fulfilled prophecy. To believe otherwise is to call
into question the truthfulness of Scripture. Anyone reading Matthew 24:34
for the first time knows what it says. It takes "experts" to convince them
that it means something different from what it says. Jesus said that the
generation of His day would see all "these things" (Matt. 24:33) take place.

What Do the Lexicons Say?

Scofield claimed that all the lexicons agree that genea means "race." The
lexicons do not agree. Like Scofield, Norman Geisler, in his critique of
Hank Hanegraaff’s book The Apocalypse Code, argues that the Greek word
genea "can" be translated "race." He writes: "as virtually all acknowledge, it
can mean 'this [Jewish] race' will not pass away — which it has not. Greek
experts Arndt and Gingrich acknowledge that the term genea can have an
ethnic use of 'family, descent,... clan, then race' (Greek-English Lexicon of
the New Testament, 249, emphasis added)."
Geisler says "can have." But there is no place in the New Testament
where genea is translated as "race," and the lexicon cited by Geisler does
not point to a verse where "race" would be the appropriate translation. (The
KJV translates genos [race] as "generation" in 1 Peter 2:9 but other
translations translate it more accurately as "race.") Moreover, Geisler does
not tell his readers that the Greek-English Lexicon he cites does not support
his claim. The following is from the latest edition of A Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament (BDAG):

[γενεά]: the sum total of those born at the same time, expanded to
include all those living at a given time and freq[uently] defined in
terms of specific characteristics, generation, contemporaries... Jesus
looks upon the whole contemp[orary] generation of Israel as a uniform
mass confronting him (cp. Gen 7:1;57 Ps 11:8) Mt 11:16; 12:41f;
23:36; 24:34; Mk 13:30; Lk 7:31; 11:29-32, 50f; 17:25; 21:32 ... the
time of a generation, age (as a rule of thumb, the time between birth
of parents and the birth of their children."58

Thomas A. Howe cites part of BDAG's definition of genea and then states it
"does not specify which time period, only that the word can be used to refer
to a group in a given time period."59 He is incorrect since BDAG states,
"Jesus looks upon the whole contemp. generation of Israel as a uniform
mass confronting him" and then references Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30,
and Luke 21:32. The time period is identified; it's the "whole contemporary
generation of Israel," not some distant unnamed generation.
In addition to BDAG, there's Joseph Henry Thayer's A Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament: "[Genea] the whole multitude of men living
at the same time: Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 1:48 (πᾶσαι αἱ
γενεαί)."60 G. Abbott-Smith's A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New
Testament offers a similar definition: "[O]f all the people of a given period:
Mt 24:34, Mk 13:30, Lk 21:22, Phl 2:15; pl., Lk 1:48."61
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology where in
 Matthew's Gospel genea "has the sense of this generation, and according to
the first evangelist, Jesus expected the end of this age to occur in
connection with the judgment on Jerusalem at the end of that first
generation (see Mk. 9:1 and Matt. 16:18)."62 Colin Brown adds to
Morgenthaler's entry:

The events referred to in Mk. 13:30 par. Matt. 24:34 and Lk. 21:32
have generally been taken to refer to cosmic events associated with the
second coming of Christ.... But if these events were expected within
the first generation of Christians (and "generation" is the most
probable translation of genea), either Jesus or the evangelists were
mistaken. The failure of events to materialize has been put down to a
postponement of the catastrophe and to a telescoping of events,
comparable with seeing a mountain range at a distance. The
perspective makes the mountains appear to stand close together, and
indeed relatively speaking they do stand close together. However,
there is an alternative interpretation of the passage which points out
that insufficient attention has been paid to the prophetic language of
the passage as a whole.63

Referencing Matthew 24:29, Brown adds, "The imagery of cosmic

phenomena is used in the OT to describe this-worldly events and, in
particular, historical acts of judgments." At this point in his comments,
Brown offers a list of numerous passages from the Old Testament to
support his argument. In view of these examples, he continues:

Mk. 13:24-30 may be interpreted as a prophecy of judgment on Israel

in which the Son of man will be vindicated. Such a judgment took
place with the destruction of Jerusalem, the desecration of the Temple
and the scattering of Israel — all of which happened within the
lifetime of "this generation." The disintegration of Israel as the people
of God coincides with the inauguration of the kingdom of the Son of
man. Such an interpretation fits the preceding discourse and the
introductory remarks of the disciples (Mk. 13:1ff. par.). It would not,
however, pre-empt the judgment of mankind in general (See further J.
Marcellus Kik, Matthew XXIV: An Exposition, 1948; R. T. France,
Jesus and the Old Testament, 1971, 227-39.)

Then there's Robinson's Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament, "ἡ
γενεὰ αὕτη [this generation], etc. the present generation, Matt. xi. 16. xii. 39,
41, 42, 45. xvi. 4. xvii. 17. xxiii. 36. xxiv. 34. Mark viii... xiii. 30.... Luke xi. 29,
30, 31, 32, 50, 51. xvii. 25. xxi. 32. Acts ii. 40. Phil. ii. 15."64
In every case, "this generation" refers to the generation to whom Jesus
was speaking because of His constant use of the second person plural, the
use of the near demonstrative "this," the consistent translation of genea as
"generation" throughout Matthew's gospel and the rest of the New
Testament, and the lexical references that use Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30,
and Luke 21:32 as examples to support their definition that genea means
"the sum total of those born at the same time." And when was that? In the
lead-up to events that led to the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem just
as Jesus had warned (Matt. 24:1-3).

1. Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Ch. 7.

2. Henry Hammond, A Paraphrase, and Annotations Upon all the
Books of the New Testament, Briefly Explaining all the Difficult Places
Thereof (London: Printed for John Nicholson, at the King's-Arms in Little
Britain, 1702), 102.
3. John Lightfoot, A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica,
4 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, [1658-1674] 1859), 2:320.
4. Jonathan Edwards, "Observations on the Facts and Evidences of
Christianity, and the Objections of Infidels," The Works of Jonathan
Edwards, Part 1, Chap. 2, § 17.
www.ccel.org/ccel/edwards/works2.x.ii.i.html
5. Jonathan Edwards, "When the Wicked Shall Have Filled Up the
Measure of Their Sin, Wrath Will Come Upon Them to the Uttermost"
(May 1735): www.biblebb.com/files/edwards/uttermost.htm
6. Philip Doddridge, The Family Expositor; or, A Paraphrase and
Version of the New Testament; with Critical Notes, and a Practical
Improvement of each Section, 6 vols. (Charlestown, MA.: Ethridge and
Company, 1807), 1:377.
7. Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies, Which Have
Remarkably Been Fulfilled (London: J.F. Dove, 1755), 377.
8. John Gill, An Exposition of the New Testament, 3 vols. (London:
Mathews and Leigh, 1809), 1:296.
9. Thomas Scott, The Holy Bible Containing the Old and New
Testaments, According to the Authorised Version; with Explanatory Notes,
Practical Observations, and Copious Marginal References, 3 vols. (New
York: Collins and Hannay, 1832), 3:111.
10. "'The word γενεὰ, says OLSHAUSEN, whose testimony in such a
case has peculiar weight, 'is not used in the sense of nation in any one
passage, either of the new Testament or of profane writers.' — (Comm. ad
loc)."
11. David Brown, Christ's Second Coming: Will it be Premillennial?,
3rd ed. (Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1853), 435.
12. Patrick Fairbairn, ed., The Imperial Bible-Dictionary: Historical,
Biographical, Geographical and Doctrinal, 3 vols. (London: Blackie and
Son, 1866), 1:644.
13. Henry Cowles, Matthew and Mark, with Notes: Critical,
Explanatory, and Practical, Designed for Both Pastors and People (New
York: D. Appleton & Co., 1881), 219.
14. Milton S. Terry, Biblical Apocalyptics: A Study of the Most
Notable Revelations of God and of Christ (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book
House, 1898), 249. "The significations which, apparently under the pressure
of an assumed exegetical necessity, have been put upon the words ἡ γενεὰ
αὕτη, this generation, may well seem absurd to the unbiased critic. To put
upon them such meanings as 'the human race' (Jerome), or 'the Jewish race'
(Clarke, Dorner, Auberlan), or 'the race of Christian believers' (Chrysostom,
Lange), may reasonably be condemned as a reading whatever suits our
purpose into the words of Scripture. The evident meaning of the word is
seen in such texts as Matt. i, 17; xvii, 17; Acts xiv, 16; xv, 21 (by-gone
generations of old), and nothing in New Testament exegesis is capable of
more convincing proof than that y8V8(X is the Greek equivalent of our word
generation; i.e., the mass or great body of people living at one period — the
period of average lifetime. Even if it be allowed that in such passages as
Matt. xi, 16; or Luke xvi, 8, the thought of a particular race or class of
people is implied, it is beyond doubt that in those same passages the
persons referred to are conceived as contemporaries." Milton Terry,
Biblical Hermeneutics: A Treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New
Testaments (New York: Phillips & Hunt, 1883), 443, note 1.
15. John A. Broadus, "Matthew," An American Commentary of the
New Testament, ed. Alvah Hovey (Philadelphia: The American Baptist
Publication Society, 1886), 491-492.
16. G.R. Beasley-Murray, A Commentary on Mark Thirteen (London:
Macmillan & Co. Ltd., 1957), 100. Also, Beasley-Murray's comments in
Jesus and the Last Days: The Interpretation of the Olivet Discourse
(Peabody, MA: Hendrick- son Publishers, 1993), 444.
17. Robert G. Bratcher and Eugene A. Nida, A Translator's Handbook
of the Gospel of Mark (New York: United Bible Societies, 1961), 419.
18. William L. Lane, Commentary on the Gospel of Mark (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 480.
19. Jack P. Lewis, The Gospel According to Matthew, Part 2; Living
Word Commentary: Sweet Publishing, 1976), 128.
20. D. A. Carson, "Matthew" in The Expositor's Bible Commentary
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1985), 8:507.
21. William Sanford LaSor, The Truth About Armageddon: What the
Bible Says About the End Times (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House,
1987), 122.
22. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, eds. Gordon. J.
Wenham, J. A. Motyer, D. A. Carson, R. T. France (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1994), 936, 937.
23. F. F. Bruce, The Hard Sayings of Jesus (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1983), 227.
24. John Nolland The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek
Text (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 988-989.
25. R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew: The New International
Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007),
930.
26. Paul Copan, When God Goes to Starbucks: A Guide to Everyday
Apologetics (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2008), 163. See the full
contents of chapters 15 and 16.
27. Grant R. Osborne, Matthew: Exegetical Commentary on the New
Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 899-900.
28. Matthew 24 does not say Jesus will return to earth to reign as king.
29. Why does "near" mean "even at the doors" for Morris in the
twentieth century, but it did not mean "near" in the first century?
 30. Notice how Morris uses the far demonstrative "that" to refer to a
generation in the past. How would he have described the generation in
which he was living? Obviously with the near demonstrative "this" to
distinguish it from "that" past generation.
31. Henry Morris, Creation and the Second Coming (Green Forest,
AR: Master Books, 1991), 183. Morris died on February 25, 2006 at the age
of 87.
32. Thomas A. Howe, What the Bible Really Says: Breaking the
Apocalypse Code (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009), 19. He cites Matthew
24:33 on page 10 but does not say anything about the use of the second
person plural.
33. How should Hebrews 3:10 be translated and interpreted? Is it an
exception to the contemporary use of "this generation"? The writer to the
Hebrews quotes Psalm 95:10: "Therefore I was angry with this generation,
and said, 'They always go astray in their heart; and they did not know My
ways'" (Heb. 3:10). "This" (NASB) and "that" (KJV) are not found in the
Hebrew text of Psalm 95:10. The words have been added by translators:
"For forty years I loathed [this/that] generation, and said they are a people
who err in their heart, and they do not know My ways." The Septuagint
(LXX), the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, adds the Greek
word ἐκείνῃ (that) while the writer to the Hebrews 3:10 adds ταύτῃ (this).
There is much speculation as to why he did this since he was familiar with
the LXX. Why didn't he use "that"? F.F. Bruce suggests, "Our author
perhaps replaced 'that' by 'this' in order to point the moral more tellingly for
the generation which he himself was addressing. Cf. our Lord's repeated
references to 'this generation' (Matt. 11:16; 12:4f., 45; 23:36; 24:34 and
parallels; cf. also Acts 2:40)." The Epistle to the Hebrews (The New
International Commentary on the New Testament), rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990),
95, note 28. "Some manuscripts have ἐκείνῃ [that] in Hebrews 3,10. This
can be explained as influence from the text of the Septuaginta. Many
commentators say that ἐκείνῃ [that] was changed to ταύτῃ [this] in order to
fit the quotation better in its new context." H. Welzen "Reader Response,"
The Impact of Scripture on Early Christianity, eds. J. den Boeft and M. L.
van Poll-van de Lis-donk (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 236. In his commentary on
Hebrews, John Brown explains something of its new context: "It is curious
to know that the ancient Jews believed that 'the days of the Messiah were to
be forty years.'... It is remarkable that, in forty years after the ascension, the
whole Jewish nation were cut off equally as they who fell in the wilderness"
and linking it to the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24:34). Hebrews (Carlisle, PA:
The Banner of Truth Triust, [1862] 1972), 174, note 2. See Hebrews 3:9,
17.
34. Another example is found in Tim Demy and Gary Stewart's 101
Most Puzzling Bible Verses: Insight into Frequently Misunderstood
Scriptures (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 2007), 105-106. They argue that
there is no mention of an audience reference in Matthew 24:33, just that
"The phrases 'this generation' and 'these things' are linked together by
context and grammar in such a way that Jesus must be speaking of a future
generation." This is the height of obfuscation. Jesus clearly identifies the
audience: "when you see all these things."
35. Cullen I K Story and J. Lyle Story, Greek To Me: Learning New
Testament Greek Through Memory Visualization (New York: Harper,
1979), 74. "This" refers "to something comparatively near at hand, just as
ekeinos [that] refers to something comparatively farther away." William F.
Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 4th ed. (Chicago, IL: The
University of Chicago Press, 1952), 600. "Sometimes it is desired to call
attention with special emphasis to a designated object, whether in the
physical vicinity or the speaker or the literary context of the writer. For this
purpose the demonstrative construction is used... For that which is
relatively near in actuality or thought the immediate demonstrative [houtos]
is used... For that which is relatively distant in actuality or thought the
remote demonstrative [ekeinos] is used." H. E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey,
A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York; Macmillan,
1957), 127-128, sec. 136.
36. Howe, What the Bible Really Says, chap. 4.
37. E. Schuyler English, et al., eds., The New Scofield Reference Bible
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), 1035.
38. Cyrus I. Scofield, The Scofield Reference Bible (New York:
Oxford University Press, [1909, 1917]), 1034.
39. David J. Palm, "The Signs of His Coming: An examination of the
Olivet Discourse from a Preterist Perspective," A Thesis Submitted to the
Faculty in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master
of Arts," 21.
40. Larry D. Pettegrew, "Interpretive Flaws in the Olivet Discourse,"
The Master's Seminary Journal 13/2 (Fall 2002), 173-190.
41. Michael L. Brown, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus: New
Testament Objections, vol. 4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2006), 154
and 321 note 277.
42. Michael L. Brown, 60 Questions Christians Ask About Jewish
Beliefs and Practices (Grand Rapids, MI: Chosen Books/Baker Publishing
Group, 2011), 256.
43. https://goo.gl/qKmE14
44. John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary
(Chicago: Moody Press, 1989), 64.
45. Richard C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of St. Matthew's Gospel
(Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, [1943] 1961), 952.
46. Neil D. Nelson, Jr., "'This Generation' in Matt. 24:34; A Literary
Critical Perspective," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 38:3
(September 1995), 376.
47. "[A]t least in Matthew 'this generation' may carry a qualitative as
well as a temporal meaning (compare the description 'evil and adulterous' in
12:39; 16:4) and therefore indicate that this murderous kind of people will
continue on till the Son of Man's coming." Robert H. Gundry, Commentary
on the New Testament: Verse-by-Verse Explanations with a Literal
Translation (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers/Baker Academic,
2010), 108. Such a view indicts Jews throughout the ages who had no hand
in the rejection of Jesus and His eventual crucifixion.
48. Thomas Ice and Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Great Tribulation
Past or Future (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1999), 103-104.
49 . Genetai is a second aorist and indicates completed action in the
past.
50. Stanley D. Toussaint, Behold the King: A Study of Matthew
(Portland, OR: Multnomah, 1980), 279. Toussaint seems to have changed
his view, probably because he can't find any other way to defend his end-
time position. After summarizing four interpretations, he states the
following: "A fifth interpretation seems best. It takes the verb γένηται as an
ingressive aorist. The same verb is found in all three Synoptics and is
translated 'takes place' (Matt. 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32). As an
ingressive aorist it emphasizes the beginning of the action with the meaning
'begin to take place.' All those things would begin in that generation and
find their ultimate completion at the Second Advent. This fits with the idea
of not being deceived by the events mentioned in Matthew 24:4-8. The
Lord specifically referred to these as "the beginning of birth pangs" (v. 8).
Interestingly, although Mounce does not accept this interpretation, he
suggests it as a possibility and gives no refutation of it."
51. Emphasizes the beginning of the action. "We are told, 'Jesus wept'
(Jn. 11:35). Many scholars remark that the aorist tense of 'wept' is the
ingressive aorist. Hence, some translate the verse, 'Jesus burst into tears.'"
William Hendriksen, The Gospel of John (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books,
1961), 155.
52. Robert H. Mounce, Matthew (San Francisco: Harper & Row,
1985), 235.
53. Barry Horner, "The Olivet Discourse: Matthew 24 — Futurism and
Preterism" (2008), 31: https://goo.gl/WSOcEr
54. Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical
Research.
55. Grammar of New Testament Greek.
56. A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament.
57. "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
[lit. generation]."
58. Walter Bauer, Frederick William Danker, W.F. Arndt, and F.W.
Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian Literature [BDAG], 3rd ed. (Chicago: The University of Chicago
Press, 2000), s.v. “γενεὰ.” Also available online at https://goo.gl/PBGjU7
59. Howe, What the Bible Really Says, 102.
60. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House (1979), 112.
61. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clarke (1923), 89.
62. Robert Morgenthaler, "Generation," The New International
Dictionary of New Testament Theology, ed. Colin Brown, 3 vols. (Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1976), 2:37-38.
63. "Generation," New International Dictionary of New Testament
Theology, 2:38-39.
64. London: William Tegg and Co. (1852), 151.
 Conclusion and Summary

End-time speculation, much of it built on a misreading and faulty

application of the Olivet Discourse and other related prophetic passages,
has a long and failed history going back centuries, that has led to a form of
prophetic inevitability resulting in Christian passivity that goes something
like the following: "If Jesus is coming back in my generation, why expend
time and effort to fix what can't be fixed? It would be like rearranging the
deck chairs on the Titanic. It's all going down."
As Christians have waited for the soon return of Jesus in their generation.
based on the claim that the Olivet Discourse had not been fulfilled before
that first-century generation passed away, humanists, secularists, anarchists,
and atheistic materialists have infiltrated every part of society, from
education and art to economics and politics. Instead of fighting against
these man-centered worldviews, an end-time escapist eschatology was
invented with disastrous societal results.
In the book The 1980's: Countdown to Armageddon, prophecy writer Hal
Lindsey wrote, "The decade of the 1980's could very well be the last decade
of history as we know it." Lindsey expressed the logic of his error in the
following analogies:

• What a way to live! With optimism, with anticipation, with

excitement. We should be living like persons who don't expect to be
around much longer.1

• I don't like cliches but I've heard it said, "God didn't send me to clean
the fish bowl, he sent me to fish." In a way there's a truth to that.2

When the fish bowl is not cleaned, the fish die. How long and wrong can
prophetic speculation go on before a cultural collapse takes place? What a
person believes about Bible prophecy determines how he or she will live in
the present and plan and work for the future. I'm hopeful that Wars and
Rumors of Wars will serve as an antidote to such speculation.
What we are seeing today is the end of a humanistic worldview that
cannot sustain itself. God has placed before us a wonderful opportunity.
Will we meet the challenge? Charles H. Spurgeon, the great nineteenth-
century Baptist preacher, made these comments in his commentary on
Psalm 86:9:

David was not a believer in the theory that the world will grow worse
and worse, and that the dispensations will wind up with general
darkness, and idolatry. Earth's sun is to go down amid tenfold night if
some of our prophetic brethren are to be believed. Not so do we
expect, but we look for a day when the dwellers in all lands shall learn
righteousness, shall trust in the Saviour, shall worship thee alone, O
God, and shall glorify thy name. The modern notion has greatly
damped the zeal of the church for missions, and the sooner it is shown
to be unscriptural the better for the cause of God. It neither consorts
with prophecy, honours God, nor inspires the church with ardour. Far
hence be it driven.3

You can't beat something with nothing, and you certainly can't beat
something if you give up on the future.
Jacques Barzun, author of numerous books that trace the history of ideas
and culture, offers an assessment of how the future is discounted by the
perception that the present is bankrupt, near collapse, and hopelessly lost:

Sooner or later, the sophisticated person who reads or hears that

Western civilization is in decline reminds himself that to the living 'the
times' always seem bad. In most eras voices cry out against the visible
decadence; for every generation — and especially for the aging — the
world is going to the dogs. In 1493 — note the date — a learned
German named [Hartmann] Schedel [14401514] compiled and
published with comments the Nuremberg Chronicle. It announced that
the sixth of the seven ages was drawing to a close and it supplied
several blank pages at the end of the book to record anything of
importance that might occur in what was left of history. What was left,
hiding around the corner, was the opening up of the New World and a
few side effects of that inconsequential event. A glance at history, by
showing that life continues and new energies may arise, is bound to
inspire skepticism about the recurrent belief in decline.4
Even during a time when the end of Israel's world was taking place and
Christians were being persecuted, the church advanced and changed the
world at large. What we are seeing today is a collapse of God-denying
materialistic worldviews that cannot survive as they become consistent with
their unsustainable operating presuppositions. The apostle Paul wrote, they
are "always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth...
But they will not make further progress" (2 Tim. 3:7-9).

Summary of the Olivet Discourse

Does the Olivet Discourse describe signs that were fulfilled in (1) events
leading up to and including the destruction of the temple in AD 70, (2) a
future generation, (3) a past generation and a future fulfillment (double
fulfillment), or (4) a micro/macro fulfillment? Attempts to get around the
plain language of Matthew 24:34, that "this generation" refers to the
generation of Jesus' day, are not exegetically viable. The following is a
summary of the material presented in Wars and Rumors of Wars.

Matthew 23:31-24:1-34

23:31-32
Audience relevance is important. Jesus is not indicting a future generation.
He is pronouncing judgment on that living generation ("this generation":
23:36; 24:34). Stephen raises the same points in Acts 7:51-52. The
audience, which included the pre-conversion Saul, would not have been
incensed if Stephen was describing a future generation.

23:33
Note the audience reference: "how would you escape the sentence of hell
[Gehenna]?" (see Matt. 5:22). "You" means them.

23:34
We know from the book of Acts (4:1-3, 18-31; 5:18, 27, 40; 7:54-6; 8:1;
9:5, 29; 12:1-19; 13:44-52; 14:8-20; 16:22-24; 21:27-40) and Paul's letters
(2 Cor. 11:24-25; 1 Thess. 2:14-26) that those carrying the message of the
gospel were persecuted. Tradition has it that Peter was crucified upside
down (John 21:18-19; 2 Peter 1:14). Jesus may have meant that the Jews
would approve of Romans crucifying Christians like some of them did in
Jesus' own crucifixion (John 19:15). Persecuting Christians "pleased the
Jews" (Acts 12:1-3). Albert Barnes notes: "The Jews had not the power of
crucifying, but they had power to deliver those whom they condemned to
death into the hands of the Romans to do it."5

23:35
The generation of Jesus' day is more culpable than any generation since He
appeared in the flesh (John 1:11, 14) and performed miracles and other
signs that testified to who He was. He made this point earlier (Matt. 12:41-
42). By killing Him, they would fill up or complete the iniquity of their
forefathers (Matt. 23:31-33). The Greek word gēs (γῆς) should be translated
"land," as in "land of Israel," since the line of murderers begins with Abel
(Gen. 4:10) and ends with the "Zechariah, the son of Berechiah."
Commentators argue that this Zechariah's death is recorded in 2
Chronicles 24:20-21. This is unlikely since he is identified as "the son of
Jehoiada." The better interpretation is to identify "Zechariah, the son of
Berechiah" as someone who was murdered by Jesus' present audience —
"whom you murdered" (Matt. 23:2, 13, 14, 15, 25, 26, 27, 29). Zechariah
(e.g., 1 Chron. 5:7; 9:21; 15:20-24; 24:25; 27:21; 2 Chron. 17:7; 20:14;
21:20; 29:13; Luke 1:5-7) and Berechiah (1 Chron. 3:20; 6:39; 9:16; 15:17;
15:23; 2 Chron. 28:12; Neh. 3:4, 30) are common biblical names.
There is an OT "Zechariah, son of Berechiah" (Zech. 1:1), but there is no
evidence he was murdered. "It is obvious that Christ here referred to some
secret murder perpetrated, not by the ancestors of those men, but 'by
them.'"6

23:36
The "this generation" was their generation that came under judgment, not a
future generation that did not collude with the Romans to crucify "the Lord
of glory" (1 Cor. 2:8). "This generation" is always used by Jesus to refer to
the generation of His day. "Every other use of 'this generation' in Matthew
(11:16; 12:41-42, 45; 23:36) refers to Christ's contemporaries."7

23:37
Jesus addresses His Jewish audience (not the world) as "Jerusalem,
Jerusalem." He is expressing His concern for those in the city because of
the dreadful period of tribulation that is coming upon their generation.
Jerusalem is the city that "kills the prophets and stones those who are sent
to her." The word "gather" (ἐπισυνάγω/episunagō) is not the "rapture." The
image of God gathering the faithful Remnant is taken from the Old
Testament (e.g., Isa. 11:11-12; 27:12-13; 43:5-6).

23:38
The "house" that Jesus says will be left to them "desolate" refers to the
temple (24:1). There is now a new house: "but Christ was faithful as a Son
over His house whose house we are" (Heb. 3:6; also 1 Cor. 3:16-17).

23:39
Note the audience reference: "I say to you... you will not see me... until
you." The warning is conditional: "until you say." R. T. France comments
that "the words until you say are expressed in Greek as an indefinite
possibility rather than as a firm prediction; this is the condition on which
they will see him again; but there is no promise that the condition will be
fulfilled."8 See Matt. 5:26; 18:30, 34; Acts 23:12. We find in the book of
Acts that many Jews embraced Jesus as the promised Redeemer (Acts 2:37-
47; 4:4).

24:1
In His previous discourse, Jesus mentioned that their "house" would be left
to them "desolate" (Matt. 23:38). The disciples understood what Jesus was
saying since they immediately point out the "temple building to Him."
Their "house" was the temple from which Jesus departed.

24:2
Anticipating their thoughts, Jesus said that the existing temple ("not one
stone here"), not a rebuilt future temple, would be completely torn down.
When the Roman commander Titus attacked Jerusalem in AD 70, the
temple eventually was dismantled as Jesus had predicted. "We do not have
any remains of the Herodian temple itself because of the devastating
Roman destruction in A.D. 70."9 Terentius Rufus, an officer under Titus,
plowed up the foundation stones with the result that the prophecy "Zion
will be plowed as a field, Jerusalem will become a heap of ruins" (Micah
3:12) was fulfilled.
Some commentators claim that since the "Wailing Wall" is still standing,
the prophecy has not been fulfilled and awaits a rebuilt temple and future
destruction. The disciples pointed out the "buildings" and asked about them,
not Herod's walls that were not part of the temple structure.

24:3
After hearing Jesus' prediction, the disciples ask three related questions: (1)
when will these things happen, (2) what will be the sign of His coming, and
(3) the end of the age. They do not ask about the end of the world as the
KJV translates the Greek word aiōnos (αἰῶνος). The more accurate
translation is "age," a period of time not the physical world (kosmos, which
is not used). The age that was coming to an end was the Old Covenant
represented by the temple, priesthood, and animal sacrifices. With the
temple destroyed, all the elements of the Old Covenant would pass away
with it (see 1 Cor. 10:11; Heb. 9:26). With Jesus, the age of the Messiah
had dawned.
The disciples equated the destruction of the temple with Jesus' coming in
judgment (Matt. 22:7). The word for "coming" is parousia which nearly all
lexicons translate as "presence," as the presence of a dignitary or king. The
debate over the meaning of parousia is whether it demands a physical
presence or a symbolic real presence similar to when Jesus said, "For where
two or three have gathered in My name, I am there in their midst" (18:20).
Can God arrive in a demonstration of power and be really present? For
example, "For behold, the Lord is coming forth from His place. He will
come down and tread on the high places of the earth" (Micah 1:3; cp. Isa.
19:1; 26:21; Jude 14). Josephus (c. 37- c. 100) "uses 'parousia' for the
theophany at —> Sinai and also for God's almighty presence in history
(Ant. 3.80, 202-3; 9.55; 18.284)."10
James writes that the "coming [parousia]" was "near ... right at the door"
(5:8-9). Parousia in the NT (Matt. 24:3, 27, 37, 39; 1 Cor. 15:23; Heb.
10:24; 1 Thess. 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:1, 8, 9; James 5:7-8; 2
Pet. 1:16; 3:4, 12; 1 John 2:28).

24:4
Notice the audience reference. Jesus uses the second person plural ("you").
Some claim that the "transcendent you" is being used where God speaks to
a present audience but He is actually addressing future unborn generations.
There is nothing in this passage and in chapters 21-23 that indicate such a
usage. Jesus has His contemporaries in view. Jesus was describing what
was going to happen to their generation (Matt. 24:33) as history attests
(Acts 20:28-30; 1 Cor. 11:19; 2 Cor. 11:13; Gal. 1:6-9; 2:4; Titus 1:10; 1
John 2:18-19; 4:1; 2 Pet. 2:1: "among you"; Jude 4; Rev. 2:2; 2:9; 3:9).

24:5
R. T. France writes: "Such 'false Messiahs and false prophets' active during
the siege [of Jerusalem] might include Simon bar-Giora (Josephus, War
4:503-44 etc.), who was regarded as a 'king' (510) ... and also 'many' false
prophets noted anonymously in War 6.285-88; that last passage goes on to
relate (6.289-300) a series of signs and wonders occurring in the period
before the city was destroyed, which some took (wrongly) to be omens of
deliverance."11 The "many antichrists" alive at that time could have been
rival christs (1 John 2:18) since the Greek word anti can mean "in place of"
or "instead of."

24:6
"You are about [μελλήσετε] to hear." According to several secular histories
of the era, wars were common throughout the Roman Empire prior to the
destruction of the temple in AD 70. "The forty years that intervened before
the destruction of Jerusalem were full of these in all directions; but we may
probably think of the words as referring specially to wars, actual or
threatened, that affected the Jews, such, e.g., as those of which we read
under Caligula, Claudius, and Nero (Jos. Ant. xx. 1, 6). The title which the
historian gave to his second book, 'The Wars of the Jews,' is sufficiently
suggestive."12 Rome was an empire of nations held together by forced
allegiance to Rome and her god-like emperors.

24:7
Mention of an Empire-wide famine is found in Acts 11:28-29. The Greek
word translated as "world" in many translations is oikoumenē (11:28), not
kosmos. The famine was over the then known world, i.e., the Roman
Empire (Luke 2:1). Christians participated in famine relief (Acts 11:29-30;
Rom. 15:25-28; 1 Cor. 16:1-5).
Earthquakes are recorded in the NT (Matt. 27:51-54; 28:2; Acts 4:31;
16:26) and in secular histories of the era that took place throughout the
Empire. "On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the
rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other
districts were thrown down." (Thallus, c. AD 52). Major earthquakes that
occurred before the destruction of Jerusalem: Crete (AD 46 or 47), Rome
(51), Phrygia (53), Laodicea (60), Campania (62 or 63), Pompeii (63), and
Judea (according to Josephus).13 Note that the passage does not say that
there will be an increase in the number or magnitude of earthquakes.

24:8
These common "things" (wars, famines, earthquakes) are the beginning of
signs leading up to the destruction of the temple that took place before "this
generation" passed away (Matt. 24:34).

24:9
Notice the use of the second person plural ("you"). The apostles were
arrested and jailed (Acts 4:1-3), threatened (4:18-21), and later "flogged"
(5:40-41). Stephen (7:54-60) and James, the brother of John, were executed
(12:2). Paul was stoned and left for dead (14:19). Men and women were
dragged from their homes and placed in prison (Acts 8:1, 3; 9:1-2, 26:9-10)
and put to death (26:10). Also see Matthew 10:17-18, 22; 2 Cor. 11:24-26;
John 15:18-25; 16:2.

24:10
There was a "little apostasy" prior to the destruction of the temple (Acts
20:28-31; 2 Cor. 11:13; Gal. 1:8-9; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 4:3; 2 Pet. 2:1, 20-
22; 1 John 2:18; 4:1). Paul mentions "false brethren" (2 Cor. 11:26; Gal.
2:4; Acts 15:1, 24) and how he had been deserted by Demas (2 Tim. 4:10).
At one point "all deserted" him (4:16). John writes: "They went out from
us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would
have remained with us; but they went out, in order that it might be shown
that they are not of us" (1 John 2:19).

24:11
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they
are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world"
(1 John 4:1; see 2 Cor. 11:13-14; 2 Pet. 2:1).

24:12
Lawlessness was a major problem in the first century as it is in every era
because we are sinners. There were problems with homosexuality (Rom.
1:26-31; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; 1 Tim. 1:10), incest (1 Cor. 5:1), prostitution (6:15-
16), fornication (5:1, 11; Rev 2:20), kidnapping (1 Tim. 6:10; Rev. 18:13).
There was a wave of general unrighteousness (1 Cor. 6:9-11; 1 Tim. 1:8-
11). Also, see the secular histories of the Roman emperors Caligula and
Nero.

24:13
The "end" is the "end of the age" (Matt. 24:3; also Rom. 13:11; 1 Cor.
10:11; Heb. 1:2; 9:26), not the world. The "salvation" refers to physical
safety, not eternal life.

24:14
Jesus was not predicting that the gospel needed to go into the whole wide
world before that contemporary generation passed away. Jesus uses the
Greek word oikoumenē, the only time the word is used in Matthew's gospel,
that refers to a limited geography — the known or inhabited world, the
political boundary of the Roman Empire. Compare with Luke 2:1: "Now in
those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus, that a census be taken
of all the inhabited world (oikoumenē). Paul's letters describe how the
gospel had been "proclaimed throughout the whole world" (Rom. 1:8), "in
all the world" (Col. 1:6), "in all creation under heaven" (1:23), "to all the
nations" (Rom. 16:26), and "believed on in the world" (1 Tim. 3:16). In the
above examples where "world" is found, the Greek word kosmos is used
which certainly includes the limited geography meaning of oikoumenē. If
Jesus had used the word kosmos instead of oikoumenē, Matthew 24:14
would still have been fulfilled before that generation passed away.

24:15
Audience relevance is important: "when you see the ABOMINATION OF
DESOLATION," or as Luke records it, "when you see Jerusalem
surrounded by armies" (21:20). No future audience is indicated. Many
commentators claim that the abomination that brings about the desolation of
the temple are the Roman armies and their pagan symbols. Why would God
destroy the temple for something the Romans did? Jerusalem surrounded by
the Roman armies only indicates that the desolation was near not that it was
the abomination that brought on the desolation. James Jordan writes,
"surrounding Jerusalem is not the same as standing in the Temple."
The abomination is related to the pagan practices of the Christ-denying
Jewish priesthood. "The other passages in Daniel [11:31] to which Jesus
alludes indicate that counterfeit worship was set up in the Temple, and that
this was the abomination of desolation…. With the death of Christ, the
sacrificial system came to an end. Any blood sacrifices offered after the
cross were potential abominations."

24:16
Fleeing to the mountains surrounding Judea shows that the judgment is
local, not global, and is reminiscent of similar escapes from local judgments
that we read about in the Old Testament. Lot and his family had been
warned by the angels, "escape to the mountains, or you will be swept away"
(Gen. 19:17; see 14:10). Jesus warned those of His generation, "Remember
Lot's wife" (Luke 17:32).

24:17-20
Flat roofs, working in fields, and restrictive Sabbath laws are descriptive of
life in Israel in Jesus' day. The fact that the escape can take place on foot is
another indication that what is being described is a local event. "It is
difficult to assign the admonitions of these verses to the end times, for no
one will be able to flee from the judgment of God in that day. The
warnings, however, make good sense in the context of the approach of the
Roman army before the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70."14

24:21
Luke describes the time of tribulation as one of "great distress" as being
"upon the land," that is, the land of Israel, "and wrath to this people, and
they will fall by the edge of the sword" (Luke 21:22-24). The phrase "nor
ever shall" most likely is a "rhetorical superlative." The phrase was used to
describe the destruction of the first temple: "And because of all your
abominations, I will do among you what I have not done, and the like of
which I will never do again" (Ezek. 5:9). Charles H. Spurgeon wrote the
following on his comments on Matthew 23:34-36: "The destruction of
Jerusalem was more terrible than anything that the world has ever
witnessed, either before or since. Even Titus seemed to see in his cruel
work the hand of an avenging God. Truly, the blood of the martyrs slain in
Jerusalem was amply avenged when the whole city became a veritable
Aceldama, or field of blood."15

24:22
Some commentators claim that the use of "all flesh" must be a reference to
the world as we know it today. "[A]ccording to the context," William Lane
writes, "pasa sarx ('all flesh'] ... must be understood of Judea and
Jerusalem. Cf. Jer. 12:12 where a similar expression designates the
inhabitants of Judea."16 In other contexts, "all flesh" does not always mean
every person without exception, that is, everybody alive in the entire world.
"But this is what was spoken of through the prophet Joel,... 'That I will pour
forth of My Spirit upon all flesh'" (Acts 2:16-17). The context makes it
clear that "all flesh" is a reference to all types of people: sons and
daughters, young men and old men, and bond slaves, both men and women.
Not everyone without exception, but everyone without distinction, Jews as
well as Gentiles. "All mankind' seems to be defined by what follows: old
and young, women as well as men."17

24:23-26
This warning refers to a period just before the actual destruction of the
temple. Josephus writes: "A false prophet was the occasion of these
people's destruction, who had made a public proclamation in the city that
very day, that God commanded them to get upon the temple, and that there
they should receive miraculous signs of their deliverance. Now, there was
then a great number of false prophets suborned by the tyrants to impose
upon the people, who denounced this to them, that they should wait for
deliverance from God...."18
Like the false prophets who gave the people an artificial sense of security
during the Babylonian invasion (Jer. 5:2-6; 6:14; 8:11: 29:9), there were
false prophets during the lead-up to the temple's destruction.

24:27
Jesus is using symbolic judgment language ("like lightning") that is
common in the OT to describe His presence/coming (parousia) that will
result in the destruction of the temple and the judgment on Jerusalem. "And
[Jesus] said to them, 'I was watching Satan fall from heaven like lightning'"
(Luke 10:18). Similar to wind and fire, lightning does "surrogate duty for
the image of the invisible God…. Scripture uses lightning as proof of
God's terrifying presence. It frightens believer and infidel alike… As
proof that God attends his chosen people in battle, lightning routs his
enemies (Ps. 77:18; 97:4, cf. 144:6; 2 Sam 22:13-15, cf. Ps. 18:14)."19
Lightning is associated with violent destruction and terror as God uses
Babylon to deliver His judgment (Ezek. 21:10, 15, 28). Notice the parallels
with the Olivet Discourse: "Son of man, set your face toward Jerusalem,
and speak against the sanctuaries, and prophesy against the land of
Israel" (21:1). A lightning strike is not seen by everyone in the world when
it strikes; it's a local phenomenon.

24:28
Being familiar with the Hebrew Scriptures, Jesus' disciples would have
understood what He was describing when He made reference to a corpse
and vultures (or eagles). They would have recognized the words of
Jeremiah that described a judgment of those who violate God's covenant:
"The dead bodies of this people will be food for the birds of the sky and
for the beasts of the earth" (Jer. 7:33). Stated later in Jeremiah, "[God] will
cause them to fall by the sword before their enemies and by the hand of
those who seek their life; and I will give over their carcasses as food for the
birds of the sky and the beasts of the earth" (19:7; also Job 39:26-30).

24:29
The use of "immediately" does not offer any other meaning than
"immediately" (Matt. 3:16; 4:20, 22; 8:3; 13:5, 20, 21; 14:22, 27, 31; 20:34;
21:2, 3; etc.). "'Immediately' does not usually make room for much of a
time gap — certainly not a gap of over 2000 years."20 The biblical approach
is to follow the Bible's own interpretive methodology of how the use of sun,
moon, and stars applies to the temporal judgment of nations (Isa. 13:1013;
24:19-23; 34:4; Ezek. 32:6-8; Joel 2:10, 30-31; 3:15-16; Hab. 3:6-11). In
none of these passages is the destruction of the earth in view.
In the OT, Israel is described as "sun, moon, and stars" (Gen. 37:9).
Israel is like the stars: "The Lord your God has multiplied you, and behold,
you are this day like the stars of heaven in number. May the Lord, the God
of your fathers, increase you a thousand-fold more than you are and bless
you, just as He has promised you!" (Deut. 1:10-11). In the NT, Israel is also
symbolized as "sun, moon, and stars" (Rev. 12:1-2). When Israel is faithful,
the sun is shining, the moon is giving off its reflective light, and the stars
are positioned high in the heavens. "In Ecclesiastes 12:1, 2, we find that the
expression 'while the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be not
darkened' is used to symbolize good times. Consequently, the reverse — an
expression about the sun, moon, and stars being darkened — would
symbolize 'evil days,' days of trouble."21
 24:30
The Son of Man "comes up to the Ancient of Days." Jesus is describing an
ascent to heaven not a descent to earth. Tim LaHaye writes that Daniel 7:13
reveals "that Christ will come from heaven to the earth," this is not what the
text says. The Ancient of Days is enthroned in heaven, not on earth or in the
"sky" (Dan. 7:9). Daniel 7:13 is quoted again, along with a portion of Psalm
110:1, when Caiaphas the high priest asks Jesus if He is "the Christ, the Son
of God" (Matt. 26:63). Jesus says to him, "You have said it yourself;
nevertheless, I tell you, hereafter [lit., from now on]22 you shall see the Son
of Man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of
heaven" (Matt. 26:64; see Heb. 8:1-2).
N.T. Wright offers the following exposition of Matthew 26:64 that also
quotes Daniel 7:13: "The Daniel text ... has nothing to do with a figure
'coming' from heaven to earth. Despite the widespread opinion that this is
what it 'must' mean in the gospels, there is no reason to suppose that on the
lips of Jesus, or in the understanding of the earliest traditions, it meant
anything other than vindication. It speaks of exaltation: of one who,
representing 'the people of the saints of the most high', is raised up from
suffering at the hands of the beasts and given a throne to sit on, exercising
royal power…. Jesus is not ... suggesting that Caiaphas will witness the end
of the space-time order. Nor will he look out of the window one day and
observe a human figure flying downwards on a cloud. It is absurd to
imagine either Jesus, or Mark, or anyone in between, supposing the words
to mean that."23 The "sign" is that the Son of Man is enthroned in heaven
(Acts 1:9-11; 2:25-36; 7:55-56; 13:32-7; Eph. 1:15-23).

24:31
Angels can either refer to supernatural beings (Heb. 1:14) or human beings.
Ed Hindson writes, "The term angel (Greek, angelos) means 'messenger.'
God's angels are His divine messengers (Heb. 1:14; Rev. 1:1), and His true
prophets and preachers are called angels of the churches (Rev. 2:1, 8, 12,
18; 3:1, 7, 14)."24
Because the land of Israel is in view, the "four winds" and "one end of
heaven to the other" are symbolic metaphors that would include the land of
Israel (Matt. 10:23) and the then-known world (see Acts 2:5-13; Rom. 1:10;
Col. 1:6, 23; 1 Tim. 3:16; Rom. 16:25-27).
When Israel was in captivity, we are told that "a great trumpet" was
blown and those "who were perishing in the land of Assyria and who were
scattered in the land of Egypt will come and worship the LORD in the holy
mountain at Jerusalem" (Isa. 27:13).
The "gathering" most likely refers to the bringing into "one new man"
(Eph. 2:15) in Christ a body of believers made up of believing Jews and
Gentiles (2:17-22), "that He might also gather [συναγάγῃ] together into
one the children of God who are scattered abroad" (John 11:47-53).

24:32
A popular view is that the fig tree is a symbol of Israel becoming a nation
again. The NT does not say anything about Israel becoming a nation again.
Larry D. Pettegrew, professor of theology at the Master's Seminary, states:
"The fig tree, however, does not illustrate Israel becoming a nation in 1948.
The fig tree is simply an illustration from nature."25
If Israel is the fig tree in Matthew 24:32, then Israel is the fig tree in
21:18-20 where Jesus says, "'No longer shall there ever be any fruit from
you.' And at once the fig tree withered." The fig tree in Matthew 24:34 only
has leaves. It's without fruit. In addition, in Luke's parallel account, we read
about "the fig tree and all the trees" (Luke 21:29). It's most likely that
Jesus is using a simply analogy: Leaves on f=trees signify that summer is
near. In the same way, when you see these signs, you will know that the
kingdom of God is near (Luke 21:31). The olive tree is a more appropriate
symbol for Israel (Rom. 11:17-21).

24:33
Jesus makes it clear that it is His present audience ("you") that will "see all
these things." "Near" is defined as "right at the door" (cf. James 5:89). Is
"He" near, or is "it" near. The Greek verb can be read either way. If Jesus
was referring to Himself, He would have said "I am near." The parallel
account in Luke reads, "So you also, when you see these things happening,
recognize that the kingdom of God is near" (21:31). Since the ministry of
John the Baptist, the message had been, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven
is at hand" (Matt. 3:2).

24:34
"This generation" has been interpreted in several ways: (1) the Jewish race,
(2) a future generation, (3) "this kind of generation," and (4) the generation
to whom Jesus was speaking.
(1) The Greek word genea can't be translated as "race" since it does not
have this meaning. If Jesus had meant "race," He would have used the
Greek word genos. Genea is used throughout the gospels to refer to a period
of time not a race of people or a nation (ethnos) (Matt. 1:17; 11:16; 12:39,
41, 42, 45; 16:4; 17:17; 23:36; 24:34; Mark. 8:12, 38; 9:19; 13:30; Luke
1:48, 50; 7:31; 9:41; 11:29, 30, 32, 50, 51; 16:8; 17:25; 21:32).
(2) The problem arguing for a future generation is that "this generation"
always refers to contemporaries. "This" is a near demonstrative adjective. If
Jesus had a future generation in view, He would have said, "that
generation." A modification of this argument is that verse 34 should read,
"the generation that sees these signs will not pass away until all these
things take place." To get this interpretation requires replacing "this" with
the definite article "the" and adding "that sees these signs." With this
approach, we can get the Bible to say anything, even "there is no God"
(Psalm 14:1).
(3) Jesus does not say "this type of generation." He says, "this
generation." Even so, the generation of Jesus day was that type of
generation, described as a "perverse generation" (Acts 2:40; see Matt.
17:17; Phil. 2:15), because it was the generation that "crucified Jesus"
(2:36, 33). If Jesus had wanted to extend "this generation" to refer to many
generations, He could have said "on all generations" (Luke 1:48) or
"generation after generation" (1:50), or "to all generations" (Eph. 3:21).
(4) "This generation" (he genea haute) occurs 18 times in the gospels
(Matt. 11:16; 12:41, 45; 23:36; 24:34; Mark 8:12 [twice], 8:38; 13:30; Luke
7:31; 11:29 [in sentence form]; 11:30, 31, 32, 50, 51, 17:25; 21:32), and
always refers to the generation to whom Jesus was addressing.

• "Matthew uses genea here for the tenth time. Though his use of the
term has a range of emphases, it consistently refers to (the time span
of) a single human generation. All the alternative senses proposed here
[in 24:34] (the Jewish people; humanity; the generation of the end-
time signs; wicked people) are artificial and based on the need to
protect Jesus from error. 'This generation' is the generation of Jesus'
contemporaries." 26

• "'[T]his generation' (ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη) in the gospels always means the

people of Jesus' own time (11:16; 12:41-42; 23:36) not, as some have
proposed, the generation of the last days in history, the Jewish people,
the human race in general, or the sinful people."27
There is unbelief in our generation and future generations, but Jesus clearly
identifies the people of His day as being part of a "perverted generation"
since it was only that generation that it's said of what it did to Jesus:
"delivered up by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you
nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death" (Acts
2:23)
Why use the second person plural "you" if Jesus didn't mean them? If
Jesus isn't referring to their generation, then what word could have He used
other than "you" if He did want to refer to them? If "this generation" does
not mean their generation, then what words could Jesus have used to mean
their generation?

1. The Late Great Planet Earth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1970),
145.
2. "The Great Cosmic Countdown," Eternity (January 1977), 21.
3. Charles H. Spurgeon, The Treasury of David: Containing the Book
of Psalms; A Collection of Illustrative Extracts from the Whole Range of
Literature; A Series of Homiletical Hints Upon Almost Every Verse; and
Lists of Writers Upon Each Psalm, 7 vols. [New York: Funk & Wagnalls
Co., (1869), 1881], 4:102.
4. Jacques Barzun, "Toward the Twenty-First Century," The Culture
We Deserve (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1989), 161.
5. Notes on the Gospels: Matthew and Mark (London: The Religious
Tract Society, 1833), 219.
6. James Burton Coffman, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
(Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University Press, 1974), 375:
http://www.searchgod-sword.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?book=mt&chapter=023
7. Thomas Ice, "The Great Tribulation is Past: Rebuttal" in Thomas Ice
and Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., The Great Tribulation: Past or Future? Two
Evangelicals Debate the Question (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 1999), 125.
8. R. T. France, The Gospel According to Matthew: An Introduction
and Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990), 332.
9. Harold Mare, The Archaeology of the Jerusalem Area (Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker, 1987), 141.
10. Martin Karrer, "Parousia," The Encyclopedia of Christianity, eds.
Erwin Fahlbusch and Geoffrey William Bromiley, 5 vols. (Grand Rapids,
MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 4:47.
11. R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew: The New International
Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007),
916, note 72.
12. E. H. Plumtre, The Gospel According to St. Mark (The New
Testament Commentary for Schools), ed. Charles John Ellicott (London:
Cassell, Petter & Galpin, 1879), 197.
13. Henry Alford, The New Testament For English Readers:
Containing the Authorized Version ... and a Critical and Explanatory
Commentary, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker, [1874] 1983), 1:163.
14. D. A. Carson, "Matthew," The Expositor's Bible Commentary:
Abridged Edition — New Testament, eds. Kenneth L. Barker and John R.
Kohlenberger III (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994).
15. A Popular Exposition of the Gospel of Matthew (London:
Passmore and Alabaster, 1893), 211.
16. William L. Lane, Commentary on the Gospel of Mark (Grand
Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,, 1974), 471 n. 82.
17. Everett F. Harrison, Acts the Expanding Church (Chicago: Moody
Press, 1975), 58.
18. Josephus, Wars of the Jews" 6.5.2
19. "Lightning," Dictionary of Biblical Imagery, eds. Leland Ryken,
James C. Wilhoit, and Tremper Longman III (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 1998), 512-513.
20. Paul T. Butler, The Gospel of Luke (Joplin, MO: College Press,
1981), 485. Quoted in William R. Kimball, What the Bible Says About the
Great Tribulation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985), 155.
21. Ralph Woodrow, The Great Prophecies of the Bible (Riverside,
CA: Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association, 1971), 81.
22. R. T. France points out that "Coming on the clouds of heaven
(together with the phrase 'the Son of man') is a clear allusion to Daniel 7:13,
already similarly alluded to in 24:30…. We have seen that its natural
application in terms of its Old Testament source is to the vindication and
enthronement of the Son of man in heaven, not to a descent to earth. It is
therefore in this verse a parallel expression to 'seated at the right hand of
Power'; the two phrases refer to the same exalted state, not to two
successive situations or events. In this verse the appropriateness of this
interpretation is underlined by the fact that this is to be true 'from now on'
(hereafter is a quite misleading rendering of the more specific phrase
ap'arti, which, as in 23:39 and 26:29, denotes a new period beginning from
now). Indeed it is something which Jesus' inquisitors themselves will see
(an echo of Zc. 12:10, as in 24:30?), for it will quickly become apparent in
the events of even the next few weeks (not to mention the subsequent
growth of the church) that the 'blasphemer' they thought they had disposed
of is in fact now in the position of supreme authority." R.T. France,
Matthew: Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI:
Eerdmans, 1985), 381.
23. N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis, MN:
Fortress Press, 1996), 524-525.
24. Ed Hindson, "False Christ's, False Prophets, Great Deception,"
Foreshadows of Wrath and Redemption, William T. James, ed. (Eugene,
OR: Harvest House, 1999), 33.
25. Larry D. Pettegrew, "Interpretive Flaws in the Olivet Discourse,"
TMSJ 13/2 (Fall 2002), 173-190.
26. John Nolland The Gospel of Matthew: A Commentary on the Greek
Text (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005), 988-989.
27. Grant R. Osborne, Matthew: Exegetical Commentary on the New
Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010), 899-900.
 For Further Study by Gary DeMar
1. A Beginner's Guide to Interpreting Bible Prophecy
2. Is Jesus Coming Soon?
3. Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church
4. The Early Church and the End of the World (with Francis X. Gumerlock)
5. The Gog and Magog End-Time Alliance
6. Left Behind: Separating Fact from Fiction.
7. 10 Popular Prophecy Myths Exposed and Answered
8. Identifying the Real Last Days Scoffers
9. Prophecy Wars: The Biblical Battle Over the End Times
10. Newspaper Exegesis, the Antichrist, and the End-Time Islamic Mahdi
11. Basic Training for Understanding Bible Prophecy (video series)

Additional Study Resources

1. Francis X. Gumerlock, Revelation and the First Century: Preterist
Interpretations of the Apocalypse in Early Christianity.
2. Francis X. Gumerlock, The Day and the Hour: Christianity's Perennial
Fascination with Predicting the End of the World
3. John L. Bray, Matthew 24 Fulfilled
4. David Chilton, The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of
Revelation.
5. David Chilton, Paradise Restored: A Biblical Theology of Dominion
6. Joel McDurmon, Jesus v. Jerusalem: A Commentary on Luke 9:5120:26,
Jesus' Lawsuit Against Israel
These Study Materials can be ordered at AmericanVision.org
 Table of Contents
ONE
TWO
THREE
FOUR
FIVE
SIX
SEVEN
EIGHT
NINE
TEN
Conclusion and Summary