And as I have said, many times, Matt 24 is about both the temple being destroyed in AD70 AND the Last Day. Here's my summary so far (again) but many haven't taken in the implications of this yet.
Matthew 24 is one of the hardest passages in the bible to put aside futurist presuppositions for a few reasons: futurists
want the whole thing to be about the End Times because that gives them modern Israel and 1948 to start drawing up timetables around. It’s also complicated because Jesus is answering 2 questions - the end of that temple
then the end of the world in the future.
Many futurists just project the whole chapter into the Last Days - and take Jesus descriptions of the Romans sacking Jerusalem and the temple in AD70 to be about some future,
still hypothetical third temple. This will not do! Jesus was not
lying to the disciples! For chapters and chapters he had been warning the disciples against the current system. He has wept over Jerusalem, his Jerusalem! He has ranted about the corrupt Pharisees, the fig tree that didn’t bear fruit, the overturning of the money changer’s tables, against the way they accepted the last few coins from the widow - “all she had to live on!”, and even said for those who had faith “this mountain falling into the sea” would not be the end of their forgiveness from God - even if the temple mountain fell into the sea!
If they were listening, they should have understood the temple’s time was up. But the disciples were gawking at the ‘large stones’ of the temple like country bumpkins in the big city. They’re still trusting in the might of the temple system. So Jesus warns them it’s all coming down! Within ‘this generation’. He’s still trying to get them thinking about relationship with God in gospel terms. They’re just not getting it yet!
But then Jesus switches from talking about ‘these things’ in front of them - the temple and the Romans destroying it within that generation - to the more distant end of the world on “That day” in verse 36. It’s going to be a while. “But about that day or hour no one knows,” and the parable of the thief, the foolish servant, and the ten maidens and their lamps all illustrate how vigilant and patient the church will have to be as we wait for “That day”.
OK then! The first half is all about the temple, and the second half from verse 36 is all about “That day”. This is confirmed in other ways as well. The destruction of the temple is predictable, local, and escapable. You can do something about it! When you see the Romans coming - run away! Flee! But “That day” will be universal, unpredictable, and totally inescapable. These are very different things.
It all seems neat and tidy - yeah right! Because the great wrinkle in dividing Matthew 24 around verse 36 is 27 to 30 - the “Lightning from east to west”, sun and moon darkened and heavens shaken stuff! That sounds pretty end-of-the-world!
So what are we to do with this? Let’s look at the GOSPEL OPTION which makes sense of the Old Testament use of this language. We need to
put aside our preconceived ideas and systematically go through this apocalyptic symbolism and try and find what is being quoted from the Old Testament. This is a view Sydney Anglicans prefer.
MATTHEW 24:29 “Immediately after the distress of those days“ ‘the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’”
= This sounds like the end of the world. But in the Old Testament this is the image used to describe a kingdom being burned to the ground.
Isaiah 13: "See, the day of the Lord is coming—a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger— to make the land desolate and destroy the sinners within it.
The stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light. The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light.”
= Isaiah writes a prophecy against Babylon where God brings Medes and Persians to strike down Babylon. But, typical of Hebrew hyperbolic symbolism - listen to this language!
Isaiah 34: “All the stars in the sky will be dissolved and the heavens rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine, like shriveled figs from the fig tree.”
= is a more universal judgment against all God's enemies - the picture of Edom. It has more graphic and physical battle language mixed in with the stars falling.
Joel 2: “Before them the earth shakes, the heavens tremble, the sun and moon are darkened, and the stars no longer shine.” = describes a vast army of the Lord bringing justice - and uses similar language.
Then what do we make of the next bit of Matt 24?
30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.
People are geographically challenged with the direction the Son of Man is travelling. He's not travelling TO the Earth here, but back TO the father!
Check Daniel 7:13 “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. 14 He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all nations and peoples of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
People always think this is the Lord coming back to earth. What if this is the Lord Jesus, the Son of Man, going back into heaven and being welcomed by the Ancient of Days, God the Father, after dying for us all? Isn't that just the appropriate image for God the Son returning as the "Son of Man" who was killed and now lives? That’s when he was given an eternal dominion - the church. It’s the message of Revelation, that although bad things happen, Jesus reigns. Indeed according to Ephesians we are reigning in heaven with him now - even as our bodies remain here on earth.
Back to Matthew 24:
31 “And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.”
The word in the Greek is angelos, and can be translated as Angels, but can also mean
messengers. This is why it’s the GOSPEL view - it's all about Jesus death and resurrection, and then the apostles gathering in the elect with the gospel message! Check these uses of "angelos" which is not angels but messengers or even spies!
James 2:25: "In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the SPIES and sent them off in a different direction?" (NIV, ESV says "messengers".)
Luke 9:52: "And he sent MESSENGERS ahead of him, who went and entered a village of the Samaritans, to make preparations for him."
So it all fits. Jesus is talking about his triumphant resurrection and welcome into heaven to sit by the right-hand of God where HE will reign from during this gospel era as the disciples go out to the ends of the earth with the new message of salvation that replaces the temple.
If I haven't explained it enough, here are Reformed Sydney Anglican Ministers doing a better job.
The first half of Matthew 24 - the readings start at 22:00 minutes in and then the talk.
The second half of
Matthew 24 - readings start at 21 minutes in.
(Also, please do not text that mobile number questions as it is only for during the service.)
The Sydney Anglican view is controversial - but this paper compares this and DA Carson and other theologians on this passage.
https://thematthewphile.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/matthew-24-25-nt4-2008-lecture-notes.pdf
