# commentaries

text:
<p>22:24&nbsp;<em>Teacher. Moses said</em>-</p><p> Luke: “<em>Moses wrote</em>&nbsp;unto us”. The Lord picks this up in His answer in :31: “Have you not read that which was&nbsp;<em>spoken</em>&nbsp;unto you by&nbsp;<em>God</em>”. He is telling them that God and not Moses was the ultimate speaker to them; and that the word was not merely&nbsp;<em>written</em>&nbsp;but is a living word, actively&nbsp;<em>speaking</em>&nbsp;unto them. For all their much vaunted belief in Divine inspiration of the Scriptures, these men had failed to perceive that God was speaking to them personally through the human authors. And that criticism needs to be remembered today by those equally wedded to a declared belief in Divine inspiration of the Bible. It is to be to us a word&nbsp;<em>spoken</em>&nbsp;and not a dead letter written on paper.</p><p><em>That if a man dies having had no children, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up seed to his brother</em>-</p><p> The Lord could have replied that if they read the entire passage in <em><a href='B:50 25:5-7'>Deu 25:5-7</a></em>, they would see that God actually made a concession in this matter; and the whole principle only applied to “brethren dwelling together”. A man did not&nbsp;<em>have to</em>&nbsp;marry his brother’s wife. In any case, as most adult men were married, it would have usually been a case of polygamy. But again, the Lord didn’t point out that expositional error, but goes on to develop a far greater and higher principle concerning the nature of His Kingdom, in which such casuistry about marriage will be simply irrelevant. And again, He sets an example to those who have spent their religious lives arguing about divorce and remarriage and fellowship issues. Their arguments could be demonstrated to be expositionally faulty. But the higher principle is that such issues shall be irrelevant in God’s Kingdom; and we are to live the essence of the Kingdom life now as far as we can, in spirit at least. The Sadducees made a big deal of the fact that the word translated “raise up seed” is that used generally in the Septuagint for resurrection. Their idea was that resurrection is not of the body but through family life. To die childless was therefore tragic indeed. The same error is made by many today who effectively believe that family life is the ultimate form of spirituality. It is not, and God seeks to build a personal relationship with each of us, He is the personal God of Abraham, Isaac etc:, and we shall experience a personal bodily resurrection at which we shall appear before God stripped of our family, and relate to Him as a single individual.</p>


text:
<p>22:25&nbsp;<em>Now there were with us seven brothers; and the first married and died having no seed, and thus left his wife to his brother</em>-</p><p> This must have been a most unfortunate family. The Old Testament speaks of the failure to build up a house / family and the death of men in youth as being a curse from God for disobedience (<em><a href='B:220 18:19'>Job 18:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 107:38-39'>Psa 107:38-39</a></em>). Again, the Lord could have made capital of this- but He didn’t. There was no element of personal attack, but rather an appeal to higher principle.</p>


text:
<p>22:26&nbsp;<em>In like manner the second also and the third, to the seventh</em>-</p><p> As noted on :25, this was clearly not a true story.</p>


text:
<p>22:27&nbsp;<em>And after them all, the woman died</em>-</p><p> She would have been judged to be a most unfortunate woman, likely under God’s judgment (see on :25). But the Lord doesn’t question the very unlikely story nor the contradictions within it- instead He works from what was presented to Him.</p>


text:
<p>22:28&nbsp;<em>In the resurrection therefore, whose wife shall she be of the seven? For they all had her</em>-</p><p> The other records add “When they shall rise from the dead”. The Lord could’ve pointed out that they were well known for denying / speaking against the resurrection. But He doesn’t make that obvious point, instead focusing on the higher principles rather than point scoring.</p>


text:
<p>22:29&nbsp;<em>But Jesus answered and said to them: You are mistaken</em>-</p><p> The same word used by the Lord in describing how He as the good shepherd was searching for the sheep of Israel who had “gone astray” (<em><a href='B:470 18:12-13'>Mat 18:12-13</a></em>). Exactly because He was searching for them with a view to saving them, He did not indulge in point scoring or exposing the numerous errors in their claims. The fact the Lord even tried with these types is a huge inspiration to us all to never give up with any group of people.</p><p><em>As you neither know</em>-</p><p> Time and again the Lord assaults their pride in knowing the text of Scripture. “Have you&nbsp;<em>never</em>&nbsp;read” is commonly on His lips. We can read, and yet never really read; know, but never know. Familiarity with Bible phrases is simply not the same as understanding them correctly.</p><p><em>The Scriptures, nor the power of God</em>-</p><p> The two are paralleled, with every relevance for the Sadducees who denied the Old Testament’s inspiration apart from the Torah. Likewise in their audience the Lord pointed out that David in the Psalms spoke “in Spirit” (:43)- the Psalms were inspired as much as the Torah.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:30'>Mat 22:30</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For in the resurrection</em>-</p><p> Why does the Lord speak of the Kingdom of God as “the resurrection”? Perhaps it is to pave the way for His teaching that “all live unto Him”, in the sense that here He is likewise raising the idea that time will have a different dimension then. The joy and freshness of resurrection will last eternally. The Kingdom will be as it were an eternal moment of resurrection, an eternal now, with no fading thrill but an “everlasting joy upon our heads” that will not fade and morph with familiarity and the passage of time.</p><p><em>They neither marry nor are given in marriage</em>-</p><p> Note the present tenses. They are more striking in <em><a href='B:490 20:36'>Luk 20:36</a></em>: “Neither&nbsp;<em>can they die</em>… they&nbsp;<em>are</em>&nbsp;equal unto the Angels: and&nbsp;<em>are</em>&nbsp;the children of God, being the children of the resurrection”. Greek tenses, unlike Hebrew tenses, are precise. We would expect ‘They shall not die… shall be equal… shall be…’. But the present tenses are striking. The Lord is building up to His point that the question about marriage is inappropriate because God is outside of our kind of time; He sees the believers in Him as even now immortal, a point made more strongly in John’s Gospel. This is not the same as having an immortal soul, nor does it imply conscious survival of death. Rather is it a reflection of how God from His perspective outside of time sees His children. <em><a href='B:500 3:3-5'>Joh 3:3-5</a></em> makes the same point, that we are born again of water and spirit even in this life, and thereby are living the life eternal. But that is from God’s standpoint outside of time as we experience it. <em><a href='B:490 20:37'>Luk 20:37</a></em> says that Moses “calls” present tense God “the God of Abraham…”. Not only does this imply a living word which speaks to us today, but again the point is made throughout the passage that God is outside of time. This choice of tenses in this passage is purposeful, for elsewhere we read of how Moses said or commanded things in the past tense (e.g. <em><a href='B:470 8:4'>Mat 8:4</a></em> “things which Moses commanded”, “Moses wrote”, <em><a href='B:490 20:28'>Luk 20:28</a></em>; “Moses gave you…”, <em><a href='B:500 6:32'>Joh 6:32</a></em>).</p><p><em>But are like the angels in heaven</em>-</p><p> The Sadducees denied their existence (<em><a href='B:510 23:8'>Act 23:8</a></em>). The Lord’s teaching that Angels do not marry was surely additionally an attack on the Jewish myths becoming popular at the time concerning the supposed marriage of Heavenly Angels with the daughters of men in Genesis 6. These myths are deconstructed in Jude and 2 Peter, but the Lord here is also correcting them. We marvel at how apparently ‘off the cuff’ He could speak in such a multi-faceted and profound way, addressing various issues simultaneously. Although His intellectual and spiritual ability was doubtless capable of such instant responses, I prefer to imagine the Lord reflecting deeply upon God’s word and preparing His ideas throughout the years of spiritual mindedness that preceded His ministry.</p><p><em><a href='B:490 20:36'>Luk 20:36</a></em> adds that we shall be as “the children of God”, thereby answering the Sadducees idea that it is a human duty to have children and thereby continue the race, for therein do we have our ‘resurrection’. Again the Lord is lifting the whole question to a far higher level. Luke adds that the Lord first said that “the children of this world marry…”. The Sadducees were assuming that the Kingdom of God would be a kind of continuation of this present life, just with eternity of nature. Whilst there are similarities and aspects of continuity between who we are and who we shall eternally be, we are mistaken in imagining the future Kingdom of God as some kind of ideal earthly situation, a tropical paradise holiday, which shall last eternally. This is the same mistake as thinking that we shall eternally be doing what “the children of&nbsp;<em>this</em>&nbsp;world” currently do. Instead of criticizing and exposing the faults in the argument presented, the Lord makes the point that the Kingdom of God will not be about marriage nor about casuistic arguments about the definition of marriage- the very arguments which have occupied the minds of far too many of His children. Paul uses the same logic in reasoning that arguments about food are irrelevant because the Kingdom of God will not be about such behaviour, but about love, peace and joy (<em><a href='B:520 14:17'>Rom 14:17</a></em>). Paul, like the Lord here, could have exposed the fallacies of exposition being engaged with, but instead reasons on a higher level- that seeing we shall not be arguing about such things eternally, let us not do it now.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:31'>Mat 22:31</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have you not read</em>-</p><p> Of course they had, but the Lord is yet again making the point that we can read Scripture many times but not really read it as intended.</p><p><em>What was spoken to you by God, saying</em>-</p><p> <em><a href='B:480 12:26'>Mar 12:26</a></em> records the Lord saying: “…God spoke unto Moses, saying”. Surely the Lord said something like ‘He spoke unto Moses, unto you, saying…’. What was spoken to Moses was spoken to them personally, just as the living word speaks to every generation. The Lord was equating each secular Jew with none less than Moses himself. This was unthinkable blasphemy in Judaistic thought, to see oneself as receiving God’s words, having God reveal Himself directly to us, just as He did to Moses. God of course had wanted to reveal Himself like this to Israel, but they asked not to hear His voice directly, wanting Moses as a mediator. But the Lord says that now, through the medium of God’s word, the voice of God comes directly to us too. In the new Israel and the new Judaism of the new covenant, in this sense we are each as Moses.</p><p>Luke adds: “That the dead are raised even Moses showed…”. Sadducees believed only in Moses’ writings, and denied the resurrection. The Lord takes that position and runs with it, instead of trying to assert the inspiration of the rest of the Old Testament.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:32'>Mat 22:32</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob?</em>-</p><p> If the Lord was looking merely for a reference to God being the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, He had many places He could have quoted from. I suggest He chose <em><a href='B:20 3:6'>Exo 3:6</a></em> partly to show that the supremely intimate, personal revelation of God to Moses was just the same now to all individuals within Israel. It was a living word spoken to them personally. But also because the Lord wants to make the point that God is outside of time- and that passage goes on to climax in the revelation of that same God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as the “I am that I am” (<em><a href='B:20 3:14'>Exo 3:14</a></em>). The God outside of time, witnessed by the way the tetragrammaton somehow straddles past, present and future tenses, therefore sees the dead as alive “unto Him”. The question put to the Lord was very much rooted in the assumption that time as we now know it is going to continue in the Kingdom of God, and the Lord is making the point that this is an immature way of looking at it; and therefore the question was irrelevant. The Exodus 3 passage also contains repeated assurance that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will receive what God has promised- which requires bodily resurrection for them. We need to ever remember that the Lord was not merely demonstrating intellectual prowess in all this reasoning and allusion. He considered them as the sheep who erred / were astray, and through all His teaching here He was merely seeking to steer them to Him and ultimate salvation.</p><p><em>He is not the God of the dead but of the living</em>-</p><p> This Greek construction could mean ‘Not only the God of the dead, but also of the living’. But the context is the Lord demonstrating that the understanding of the Sadducees was very much a dead religion and their God was effectively dead. They denied the resurrection and considered that we have reward only in this life. In this case, God was the God of Abraham only in the past. The Greek phrase could literally mean ‘Not the God the dead, but the living God’, alluding to the well known phrase “the living God”. If God only acted for Abraham etc. in the past, then the God Abraham knew effectively died when Abraham died. But the living God seeks to impart life to the faithful.</p><p><em><a href='B:490 20:38'>Luk 20:38</a></em> adds: “For all live unto Him”. The Lord is critiquing their division between this life and the life to come- by saying that the faithful live on now in God’s memory as they will eternally; He speaks of things which are not as though they are (<em><a href='B:520 4:17'>Rom 4:17</a></em>), and in this sense whether we live or die we are the Lord’s (<em><a href='B:520 14:8'>Rom 14:8</a></em>). Although the soul is mortal, the spirit returns to God and will be eternally “saved” at the last day. And the spirit refers to who a man essentially is, his thinking and character. This is preserved by God in His memory, and in that sense the faithful dead “live” before Him now. John’s Gospel puts this in so many words by saying that we can live the eternal life right now. Whilst bodily resurrection is so significant from our point of view, the God who is outside of our kind of time sees the dead as effectively living as He extends forwards into eternity from the present- in a way we cannot now do. I made the point above that recently the Lord had resurrected Lazarus, with the result that He appeared to have won over many who had previously supported the Jewish leadership. They were now trying to prove that resurrection doesn’t happen. The Lord at that time had emphasized that the resurrection of Lazarus was a visual reminder of the new life which those who believed in Him could experience right now: “Whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die” (<em><a href='B:500 11:26'>Joh 11:26</a></em>). Luke’s comment that “all live unto Him” is saying roughly the same thing. If our spirit is focused upon living and thinking the Kingdom life now, then this spirit is preserved by God upon death. And it is this which God sees after our death, and the sense in which we live unto Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:33'>Mat 22:33</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And when the crowds heard it</em>-</p><p> Our debates with others are often not so much in order to convert them, but the listening audience and onlookers. And the Lord was ever aware of this. See on :42.</p><p><em>They were astonished at his teaching</em>-</p><p> Yet for all this, it was “the multitude” who were soon shouting for His blood. Mere intellectual persuasion of the truth of theology is no guarantee that a person is truly with the Lord.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:34'>Mat 22:34</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But when the Pharisees heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they gathered together</em>-</p><p> The idea could be that the Pharisees and Sadducees, traditionally opposed to each other, were united together in their desire to again try to entangle the Lord. This unity of opposed persons and groups against Christ is a theme of the records. Just as He unites people together around Him, so He unites people against Him- thus creating the Biblical picture of how we are either in God’s people or in the group actively against them. This division will come to its final term in the latter day tribulation before the Lord’s return.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:35'>Mat 22:35</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question, testing him</em>-</p><p> Again we see the Lord’s temptations being at the hand of the Jewish religious leaders, strengthening the case for thinking that the ‘adversary’ of the wilderness temptations was likewise somehow connected to the same group or thinking:&nbsp;<em>Peirazo</em>&nbsp;can mean both to test, and also to tempt to sin in a moral sense. If in the latter sense, we must ask in what the Lord was tempted to sin? Perhaps in exasperation, inappropriate anger, or to a giving up of effort with the Israel for whom He was dying.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:36'>Mat 22:36</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the law?-</em></p><p>&nbsp;It is often claimed that this means ‘Which type of commandment?’. But the Lord’s answer suggests that He saw it as meaning ‘Which specific commandment’:&nbsp; <em><a href='B:480 12:28'>Mar 12:28</a></em> records them asking which is the greatest commandment “of all”, which requires that they wanted Him to name one specific one. Again, the Lord lifted the question to a higher level, quoting two commandments and speaking of them as one single commandment; and demonstrating that the unity of God is a command rather than a mere piece of fundamental but dead theology (see on :37).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:37'>Mat 22:37</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And he said to him: You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind</em>-</p><p> <em><a href='B:480 12:29'>Mar 12:29</a></em> adds: “The Lord our God is one”. That God is one is a command, an imperative to action. It underlies the whole law and prophets (<em><a href='B:470 22:40'>Mat 22:40</a></em>)- it's that fundamental. If there were two Gods, Yahweh would only demand half our energies. Nothing can be given to anything else; for there is nothing else to give to. There's only one God. There can be no idolatry in our lives, because there is only one God (<em><a href='B:120 19:18-19'>2Ki 19:18-19</a></em>). Because "there is none else, thou shalt keep&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;his statutes" (<em><a href='B:50 4:39-40'>Deu 4:39-40</a></em>). The Hebrew text of <em><a href='B:50 6:4'>Deu 6:4</a></em> suggests: "The Lord is our God, the Lord is one", thereby linking Yahweh's unity with His being our God, the sole Lord and unrivalled Master of His people. It also links the first principle of the unity of God with that of the covenant to Abraham; for “I will be their God" was one of the features of the covenant. The one God has only one people; not all religious systems can lead to the one Hope of Israel.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:38'>Mat 22:38</a></em>&nbsp;<em>This is the great and first commandment</em>-</p><p> They had asked which was the greatest commandment, but the Lord adds that this commandment is not only “great” but also “first”, and we can understand that as meaning first in importance in our lives. He earlier had talked about seeking&nbsp;<em>first</em>&nbsp;s:w. God’s Kingdom.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:39'>Mat 22:39</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And the second is like it</em>-</p><p> The Lord is thus putting two commandments together to form one. Hence <em><a href='B:480 12:31'>Mar 12:31</a></em> records Him concluding, having quoted the two commandments: “There is none other commandment singular greater than these plural”.</p><p><em>You shall love your neighbour as yourself</em>-</p><p> This is indeed a challenge; not only to love ourselves, but to relate to our neighbour as to ourselves. It suggests a unique unity between us and our neighbour within the Israel of God. That humanly impossible unity is only achievable by loving the one God. To love God and our brother is all part of the same thing. It is indivisible; the two commandments are in fact one commandment in practice. To claim to love God but not love or even be involved with our brother means, therefore, that we don’t actually love God. John makes this explicit in <em><a href='B:690 4:1'>1Jn 4:1</a></em>, and much of the Lord’s teaching does likewise. Yet our tendency is to isolate them, claiming to love God whilst ignoring our brother, and maintaining a strong sense of separation from him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:40'>Mat 22:40</a></em>&nbsp;<em>On these two commandments</em>-</p><p> Again, the Lord makes the point. They wanted&nbsp;<em>one</em>&nbsp;commandment isolated as the greatest, and He gave them two, with the further comment that “all the law”, all the others, hung equally upon those two. The spiritual way of life is not a case of isolating one or two commandments and keeping them, but rather living a spirit of life and thinking. Loving God and our neighbour are seamlessly united, although so many try to do one without the other. On the one extreme is the person who sits at home in splendid isolation with their love for God, on the other is the person who thinks that love for neighbour- some neighbours, anyway- is quite enough, and needs no underpinning in a love for God, which involves keeping His commandments.</p><p><em>Hang the whole law and the prophets</em>-</p><p> The Lord surely had the Sadducees in view, with the differentiation they made between law and prophets. This would support the suggestion on :34 that they were somehow involved in this ongoing questioning. The achievement of love in practice between brethren, on the basis of their unity with each other elicited by their common connection to the one God, is what the entire Law was aiming at. The 613 commandments of Moses were not, therefore, to be seen as mere tests of obedience. They were designed to produce love and unity in practice.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:41'>Mat 22:41</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, saying</em>-</p><p> The Lord had clearly done well in answering the questions, and it’s easy to misinterpret this as Him now going onto the thrust of an offensive, having successfully parried the attacks. But remember His opening comment, that they ‘erred’ or were as sheep ‘astray’. He was trying to steer them to Him, to repentance and salvation, and not to merely win an intellectual battle for its own sake. All the same, He capitalized upon their continued presence to seek to correct another major misunderstanding. His desire to save them is breathtaking. The fact there were Pharisees who later converted to Christ is proof enough that His strategy worked, at least for some (<em><a href='B:510 15:5'>Act 15:5</a></em>). And remember that Saul the Pharisee was living in Jerusalem at the time, and may well have been listening carefully.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:42'>Mat 22:42</a></em>&nbsp;<em>What do you think of the Christ</em>-</p><p> The use of&nbsp;<em>dokeo</em>, to seem or think, may be a hint that Matthew is here combating at least the incipient beginnings of Docetism, the idea that Christ only appeared to be whoever He was, a kind of Divine image cast upon the earth. This came to full term in the theology of the Trinity some time later.</p><p><em>Whose son is he? They said to him: The son of David</em>-</p><p> They were surely aware that Jesus was a son of David, on both the sides of Mary and Joseph. For they would’ve done their homework as to His apparent family of origin. See on <em><a href='B:470 22:45'>Mat 22:45</a></em>&nbsp;<em>How is He his son.</em></p><p><em><a href='B:490 20:41'>Luk 20:41</a></em> records that the Lord addressed a question to the wider audience: “How say they that Christ is David’s son?”. Having let the Pharisees give the answer, He then asks others how this can be the case. Again, the Lord’s dialogues with the Pharisees was not simply to try to convert them, but in order that the audience would learn. See on <em><a href='B:470 22:33'>Mat 22:33</a></em>&nbsp;<em>When the multitude heard this:&nbsp;</em><em><a href='B:480 12:37'>Mar 12:37</a></em> concludes the section by observing that “the common people heard Him gladly”, so again we see how the records seamlessly complement each other.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:43'>Mat 22:43</a></em>&nbsp;<em>He said to them: How then does David in the Spirit</em>-</p><p> See on <em><a href='B:470 22:29'>Mat 22:29</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The Scriptures…</em></p><p><em>Call him Lord</em>-</p><p> Judaism’s concept of Messiah has always been vague and not commonly agreed, but there was and is the idea that the likes of Abraham, Moses and David are greater than Messiah. The Lord is pointing out that David considered Messiah to be his “Lord”, just as Messiah was greater than Abraham (<em><a href='B:500 8:58'>Joh 8:58</a></em>).</p><p><em>Saying</em>-</p><p> Another present tense, continuing the Lord’s theme of God’s word being a living word speaking to us today as if in an eternal present.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:44'>Mat 22:44</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The Lord said</em>-</p><p> Clearly Yahweh. If the Divine Name was to be used in the New Testament, surely this would be the place for it. The fact it is not, when some Hebrew words are used (e.g. ‘Sabaoth’), shows clearly enough that the literal usage of the tetragrammaton is not something God sees as important or even required.</p><p><em>To my Lord-</em></p><p>&nbsp;Biblically and historically, David’s immediate ‘Lord’ was Saul. Psalms 110 was originally a revelation to David of the potential possible for Saul, who was an anointed ‘Messiah’ figure. But Saul failed, and so the fulfilment of the prophecy was rescheduled and reapplied to the Lord Jesus.</p><p><em>Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies underneath your feet</em>-</p><p> The Lord’s enemies stood around Him as He applied this Psalm to Himself:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:45'>Mat 22:45</a></em>&nbsp;<em>If David then calls him Lord, how is he his son?</p><p></em>-</p><p> The “how” doesn’t imply that David’s Lord is not his son, but rather is a rhetorical question. How is the Messianic son of David, David’s “Lord”, to be his son or descendant? <em><a href='B:480 12:37'>Mar 12:37</a></em> says the Lord reinforced the question by asking “<em>From whence</em>&nbsp;is He his son?”. The answer had to be: ‘Through a woman in David’s direct line giving birth to Him’. And the questioners were fully aware that Jesus was in the direct line of Mary (see on :42&nbsp;<em>The Son of David</em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 22:46'>Mat 22:46</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And no one could say a word in reply. From that day nobody dared to ask him any other questions</em>-</p><p> These very words are used of how the disciples after the resurrection dared not ask who Jesus was (<em><a href='B:500 21:12'>Joh 21:12</a></em>), which is the very context here. The connection is clearly to show that they too through their being too influenced by Jewish thinking found themselves in the same category as the unbelieving Jews- the difference being that they repented of it. Matthew was appealing to Jews to accept Jesus and repent of their wilful misunderstanding, and he and John are holding themselves up as a role model, just as we should in our appeals for repentance. The Greek for “questions” isn’t in the original; they dared not ask Him again. The implication from the context could be that they dared not ask Him ‘Who are You?’, for the answer was clear in their consciences. They knew, on one level, that He was Messiah, that He was the heir to the vineyard, whom they knowingly sought to murder.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:1'>Mat 23:1</a></em><em>&nbsp;Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying-&nbsp;</em>The chapter is clearly in three parts. Verses 1-12 are spoken to the disciples and the crowds; then there are the seven woes against the Pharisees (:13-33), and finally a statement of the Lord’s love toward Israel and the inevitable judgment of Jerusalem. The Lord's interchanges with the Sadducees and Pharisees in chapter 22 had been in the presence of the crowds, and He had thrown at least one question to them. Clearly He was seeking to use those dialogues to appeal to the watching audience. So often this is what happens in preaching work. It is those who are observing who are persuaded, rather than the protagonists of the discussion. The Lord realized this, and now consciously appeals to those onlookers:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:2'>Mat 23:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat</em>-</p><p> This appears to some to be a past tense: They sat themselves in Moses' seat, the place from where Moses taught Jewish teachers sat to teach, i:e. they had in the past appropriated to themselves the authority or seat of Moses. This retranslation avoids the apparent difficulty of the Lord otherwise claiming that they had equal authority to Moses. In this case, His command "That observe and do" (:3) would need to be rendered as His observation rather than His command- 'Whatever they tell you to do, that you observe and do'. But it is also possible to understand the Lord to be teaching submission, for the moment, to the religious leaders- rather than rank revolution against them. For the time to rise up in literal protest was still not yet, rather does the Lord's teaching urge that the revolt He has in mind is purely internal, deep within the human heart and psyche. By bidding obedience to those men, He would have been appealing to <em><a href='B:50 17:11'>Deu 17:11</a></em>: "And you shall observe to do according to all that they (the religious leaders) shall teach you":&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:3'>Mat 23:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore</em>-</p><p> Because they were in the place of Moses, the Lord advised obedience to them rather than quitting the synagogue system. He told His disciples that the time would come when they would be cast out of the synagogues (<em><a href='B:500 16:2'>Joh 16:2</a></em>). He clearly had no conception of guilt by association, acquired through religious association with those who taught and lived wrongly. For He goes on to roundly condemn the whole system of Judaism. Perhaps He hoped that the presence of His people amongst that system would be an influence for good upon at least some and a witness to the leadership. Or perhaps He knew that until the more public founding of the Christian church, those people had no realistic alternative but to continue attendance. For outside of the religious system they would spiritually flounder. Whatever, we never hear Him making a direct command to come out from the system until in Revelation we hear His call to come out of the latter day Babylon, which was likely an extension of His teaching in the Olivet prophecy to leave Jerusalem when she was besieged in the very last days. But this was therefore more of a call to self preservation rather than of religious separation because of differing principles. If He had intended separation for religious reasons, He surely would have called for it earlier. But He doesn't. The essential witness is made from our position embedded, at least externally, in this world.</p><p>Put together two scriptures in your mind: “You must obey the Pharisees and do everything they tell you”; and, “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees” (<em><a href='B:470 23:3'>Mat 23:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 16:6'>Mat 16:6</a></em>). Surely the Lord is teaching that we should respect elders but never cease personally analysing what they teach for ourselves. Once we stop doing this, we start resigning our own personality and will be unable to follow our Lord personally, i:e. with our own persons. And then we will be ripe for being caused to stumble, if those elders we are listening to then offend us. For ‘we’, with all that we are, will have been dominated by them.</p><p><em>All things whatever they tell you, do and observe</em>-</p><p> But soon the Lord would be sending the disciples out with the commission to teach the world “to observe s:w. all things that I have commanded you” (<em><a href='B:470 28:20'>Mat 28:20</a></em>). And this command became programmatic for the early church, whose integrity was to be judged on the degree to which they had kept / observed s:w. the Lord’s commands (<em><a href='B:690 2:3-5'>1Jn 2:3-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 3:22'>1Jn 3:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 3:24'>1Jn 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 5:2-3'>1Jn 5:2-3</a></em>; there are other allusions to the great commission in John’s letters, e.g. <em><a href='B:710 1:7'>3Jn 1:7</a></em>). So clearly enough&nbsp;<em>His</em>&nbsp;commands and the need for loyalty to&nbsp;<em>them</em>&nbsp;soon replaced His word here in <em><a href='B:470 23:3'>Mat 23:3</a></em> about observing / keeping the commands of the Scribes. He may be employing an element of sarcasm, as if to say ‘It’s OK, you don’t have to put up with this much longer; in a day’s time, I shall be dead, the Law of Moses will be completed, you will be free. But for just another 24 hours, endure their tyranny’. Only afterwards would the disciples have appreciated what the Lord meant.</p><p><em>But do not you copy their works, for they say and do not</em>-</p><p> The Lord is making a purposeful paradox. Their ‘works’ were a not doing or working. Their sins of omission were counted by Him as a work. They, of course, prided themselves upon their works. But the Lord is saying that they actually did nothing- in His book. In this lies the tragedy of Christianity as mere religion. The works can be done, and yet in the Lord’s eyes, the essential works are not done. The Lord continues His play on this idea by going on to say that the works they do are done to be seen of men (:5). They did the works but because they were done towards men and not to God, they were not really done. If we have our reward of men, then we have no reward of God. Our works s:w. must be made manifest / revealed by the light of Christ, specifically in the cross, as to whether they are worked “in God” or not (<em><a href='B:500 3:21'>Joh 3:21</a></em>). The mere doing of the work is not the basis of acceptability.</p><p>The Pharisees did all the works, but in their hearts they never knew God, and finally went and did His Son to death. The Lord plays on the fact that ultimately, in God's eyes, they did no works at all: "Do not ye after their works; for they say, and&nbsp;<em>do</em>&nbsp;not" (<em><a href='B:470 23:3'>Mat 23:3</a></em>). We are left to imagine the anger of those zealous men. They&nbsp;<em>did</em>&nbsp;do works, as the Lord observed. But to Him, ultimately they did nothing at all. They had no genuine motives.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:4'>Mat 23:4</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 23:25'>Mat 23:25</a></em>.</p><p><em>Yes, they bind heavy burdens</em>-</p><p> John appears to allude to this in saying that the true commandments are “not grievous” (<em><a href='B:690 5:3'>1Jn 5:3</a></em>, s:w. “heavy”). The fences created by men around God’s law are in fact higher than the actual Divine law. God’s laws have a creative intention, whereas human fences around them are totally negative in their intention. The Lord uses the same word later in the discourse, in stating that the ‘heavier’ matters of the law are justice, mercy and faith (:23). Yet even those things are not “heavy” (<em><a href='B:690 5:3'>1Jn 5:3</a></em>) in the sense that the regulations of the Pharisees were. The Lord’s burden is light compared with the weight of carrying unforgiven sin (<em><a href='B:470 11:30'>Mat 11:30</a></em>). The parallel between sin and heavy burdens is also found in David’s comment about carrying the weight of his unforgiven sin with Bathsheba (<em><a href='B:230 38:4'>Psa 38:4</a></em>). The burden of sin was thus tied upon people by giving them religious rules which they were unable to keep due to human weakness, and because sin is partly a matter of conscience, it was still counted to the people as sin if they broke it. Therefore to enforce such rules upon people was effectively lading them with sin. This principle needs to be considered by those who ‘bind’ isolation from other brethren upon believers, or who ‘bind’ them to a single life after divorce.</p><p><em>Hard to be carried</em>-</p><p> AV. The Lord sensitively commented that He had many things to command His disciples, “but you cannot bear / carry s:w. them at this time” (<em><a href='B:500 16:12'>Joh 16:12</a></em>). In teaching others God’s requirements, we must be sensitive to human weakness, rather than present them with a whole set of Divine standards as a package and demand their immediate acceptance of it. The Lord still accepted the disciples, even though He had not asked them to do all the things He would like to have asked them to do. And there are likewise levels of discipleship for us too. The same word is also used about carrying the cross of Jesus (<em><a href='B:490 14:27'>Luk 14:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 19:17'>Joh 19:17</a></em>). This is the ultimately hard to be carried burden. If people have signed up to carry this, who are we to seek to add to it by our demands upon them. James surely had the Lord’s teaching here in mind when he reasoned that neither the disciples nor the Jewish fathers had been able to carry the yoke of the Mosaic law (<em><a href='B:510 15:10'>Act 15:10</a></em>). Any teaching that the Mosaic law must be obeyed and there are plenty of Christians teaching this, sadly is therefore seeking to bind a heavy burden upon men which will lead to their spiritual collapse and thereby to our own condemnation.</p><p><em>And lay them</em>-</p><p> The same word used about the cross being laid upon the Lord (<em><a href='B:490 23:26'>Luk 23:26</a></em>), and the laying of the lost sheep on the shoulders of the shepherd (<em><a href='B:490 15:5'>Luk 15:5</a></em>). As this is the Lord’s only other reference to anything being laid upon the shoulders, we may be intended to understand that carrying the weight of the lost, seeking to save them, can be replaced by carrying the weight of worrying about obeying human regulations. So many spiritual lives and so much endeavour goes into keeping in with a social club based around the laws of men, when that energy could be far better used carrying the lost to salvation.</p><p><em>On men’s shoulders</em>-</p><p> The laying of an unbearable weight upon the shoulders recalls exactly the language of the cross of Christ being laid upon Him. Instead of men carrying&nbsp;<em>this</em>&nbsp;burden, they can instead end up carrying the burden of obedience to human regulations. The focus changes to obeying human expectation rather than the effort involved in engaging with the crucified Christ. All such human laws, regarding fellowship practice, dress codes etc:, are therefore likely to make men stumble and thereby bring condemnation to those who demand them. Legalism and human religion are a burden laid on men's shoulders. But the cross of Jesus is also a burden laid upon our shoulders (<em><a href='B:470 23:4'>Mat 23:4</a></em>). The greatness of the demands of the cross free us from the burdens of man's legalism. But it's still a choice, between a cross and a cross. See on <em><a href='B:470 3:11'>Mat 3:11</a></em>. As Moses "looked on their burdens" at age 40 (<em><a href='B:20 2:11'>Exo 2:11</a></em>), so at the start of His ministry, our Lord assessed the weight of ours. His concern for our burdens in <em><a href='B:470 11:30'>Mat 11:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 23:4'>Mat 23:4</a></em> is perhaps a conscious allusion back to Moses' awareness of Israel's burdens, and his desire to deliver them, even though it cost him all that he had in this world.</p><p><em>But they will not move them</em>-</p><p> Gk. 'remove' them. In His earlier teaching about this in <em><a href='B:490 11:46'>Luk 11:46</a></em>, the Lord said they would not “touch” the burdens. The Lord by contrast used touch frequently in order to connect with sinful people and their conditions, and to thereby heal them. The Pharisees would not touch them for fear of contamination; they would not associate or engage with sinful people and the results of their sins. The Lord used His fingers to enter the ears of the deaf and touch the eyes of the blind, secreting unclean body fluid. This is the way to remove burdens- to engage with them. And yet closed table policies effectively do the same, by refusing association with those judged by latter day Pharisees to be too serious sinners. The fear of guilt by association is utterly selfish, and results in the burdens never being removed or made lighter for the person struggling to carry them.</p><p><em>With their finger</em>-</p><p> The contrast is between the weight of the burdens on the shoulders of men, so great it crushed them; and the ease with which the law-makers could remove them with their fingers, perhaps referring to their ability to write things with a few strokes of the fingers which would remove those burdens. This is ever more true today- a few taps with a finger on a keyboard to change traditional demands on fellow believers, and burdens can be removed.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:5'>Mat 23:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But they do all their works</em>-</p><p> See on :3&nbsp;<em>Their works… they do not</em>.</p><p><em>To be seen by men</em>-</p><p> The same Greek word and teaching as in <em><a href='B:470 6:1'>Mat 6:1</a></em>; the Pharisees did good deeds “to be seen of men” and therefore have no reward. But the warning of <em><a href='B:470 6:1'>Mat 6:1</a></em> is to us all. Too easily we can feel that these woes against the Pharisees are not relevant to us, but they were merely giving in to the same tendencies as are common to us all. John’s Gospel uses the same word for ‘seeing’ with regard to our ‘seeing’ Jesus in the sense of believing in Him. So the contrast is between those who look to Jesus, and those who want others to look to them. Widening and enlarging the religious symbols on their clothing was exactly in order to be seen by men. Our focus upon looking toward Jesus will make us less interested in how men look upon us.</p><p><em>For they make their phylacteries wide</em>-</p><p> Nearly all the descriptions here of what the Pharisees did are couched in language which is elsewhere used about spiritual things. The point being made is that they were living a religious life which was an inversion of what true spirituality, and especially the example of the Lord Jesus, are all about. The reason why so much attention is given to the Pharisees in the Gospel records is surely because their mentality is so typically human, and their failure is preserved as a warning to all who claim to be committed to the same God of Israel. The Greek word translated “enlarge” is elsewhere nearly always used about the need to “magnify”&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;rather than ourselves (<em><a href='B:490 1:46'>Luk 1:46</a></em> “My soul&nbsp;<em>magnifies</em>&nbsp;the Lord”; <em><a href='B:510 10:46'>Act 10:46</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 19:17'>Act 19:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 1:20'>Phi 1:20</a></em>).</p><p><em>And the tassels on their garments long</em>-</p><p> The same word translated “hem” is used elsewhere only about the hem of the Lord’s garment which gave blessing and healing to others (<em><a href='B:470 9:20'>Mat 9:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 14:36'>Mat 14:36</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:6'>Mat 23:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And they love the chief place at feasts</em>-</p><p> The Lord had earlier used the very same words to describe how the attitude to places at feasts was directly relevant to placing at the Messianic banquet of the Kingdom. Those who now take the lowest places around the Lord’s table will be exalted, and those who took the high places will be demoted in “shame”, a term usually associated with rejection and condemnation (<em><a href='B:490 14:7-8'>Luk 14:7-8</a></em>). Those who consider themselves as spiritually superior in the ecclesia will be demoted and that demotion may well be in terms of condemnation. Our attitude around the Lord’s table now will be directly relevant to our placement at the Lord’s table when He returns. Those who have taken for themselves the more glorious places will be rejected- that is the clear message.</p><p><em>And the chief seats in the synagogues</em>-</p><p> They wanted to be publicly seen as spiritually superior. The whole structure of church life, whereby some must have public roles, is such that people can fall so easily into a love of publicity. The Lord realizes this, and often removes His beloved from such temptations. This explains the otherwise inexplicable way in which the Lord allows some of His most talented and capable servants to be removed from the public eye to serve Him in human obscurity:&nbsp;</p><p>Note that the Lord here is repeating almost word for word what He has previously said about the Pharisees in Luke 11. To repeat so much text twice in the Gospel records, and for the Lord to give identical word-for-word teaching on two occasions, shows how important these warnings are for all readers. This consideration alone suggests that we each have the same tendency as the Pharisees; they are but epitomes of our own deepest tendencies and desires.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:7'>Mat 23:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And the salutations in the marketplaces</em>-</p><p> The Lord’s reason for going to the market was to invite men to work in the vineyard and receive the penny of salvation (<em><a href='B:470 20:3'>Mat 20:3</a></em>); and His people sitting in the markets sought to persuade others of the need to respond to the Gospel (<em><a href='B:470 11:16'>Mat 11:16</a></em>). The Pharisees went to the markets to simply flaunt their external spirituality. Again, note how their behaviour was the very inversion of true spirituality.</p><p><em>And to be called of men, Rabbi</em>-</p><p> This uses&nbsp;<em>kaleo,&nbsp;</em>the standard word translated ‘call’. The Lord and His followers&nbsp;<em>call men</em>&nbsp;to the Kingdom from the markets (<em><a href='B:470 25:14'>Mat 25:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 14:16'>Luk 14:16</a></em>); rather than going to the markets to be&nbsp;<em>called something by men</em>. Again we see how the Pharisees’ behaviour was a parody of true spirituality.</p>


text:
<p>23:8&nbsp;<em>But you are not to be called Rabbi</em>-</p><p> The Lord was looking ahead to when those immature disciples would be the leaders of the new community He believed He was creating. He foresaw the day would come when their converts would naturally want to show them respect, and He warns against the use of titles as a sign of respect. But in this kind of thinking ahead, we have an insight into the great faith and hope the Lord had in His men; for they were so immature, and so far away from such positions of authority and leadership. But He has the same hopes for us too. His positivity is and was extraordinary. The whole vision was a huge challenge for the disciples- to learn that they would one day be the equivalent of the Rabbis in the new Israel the Lord was creating.</p><p><em>For one is your teacher-&nbsp;</em>AV "Master". ‘Rabbi’ means ‘master’ and is from the Hebrew word&nbsp;<em>ab</em>, ‘father’. This explains why having taught against using the title ‘Rabbi’, the Lord now speaks specifically about ‘master’ and ‘father’. The greatness of Christ means that once it is perceived, then we will naturally perceive that in the light of His excellence, we have no pre-eminence over each other; we are brethren, in Christ.</p><p><em>And all you are brothers- Just because</em>&nbsp;we are all brothers, actually something&nbsp;<em>more than physical brothers and sisters</em>, we are not to call any of us ‘Master’, because if we do, it will distract us from our personal looking to Jesus as Lord and Master. This is why anything that even suggests a personality cult built around leading brethren, no matter how wonderful they are or were, really must be avoided. For it takes us away from the one and only Lord and Master. Whatever leaders or organisers we have, we are to call nobody our ‘father’ in a spiritual sense. The wonder of our relationship with&nbsp;<em>the</em>&nbsp;Father ought to mean that we never do this. Above all, we are all brethren in Christ. John refers to himself as the brother of the congregation (<em><a href='B:730 1:9'>Rev 1:9</a></em>), and the leading apostles were addressed as ‘brother’ just as much as anyone else in the ecclesia (<em><a href='B:510 21:20'>Act 21:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 3:15'>2Pe 3:15</a></em>). There may be leaders among brothers (<em><a href='B:510 15:22'>Act 15:22</a></em>), but we are still essentially brethren. The intimate inter-connectedness of the family must ever remain; which explains why Paul is called ‘Paul’ and not a longer form of address. Likewise I’d suggest that the practice of calling each other by our first names, with the prefix ‘brother’ or ‘sister’, is healthy; and, indeed, a privilege. Reference to a brother as ‘Dr:’ or ‘Mr:’ seems to me to be quite at variance with the family nature of our relationship. If the Lordship of Jesus is fully felt as it should be, then even those who become leaders in the congregation the disciples, in the first instance are to feel themselves as brethren with those they are leading. This brotherhood between leaders and followers is essential for true functioning of the body of Christ.</p>


text:
<p>23:9&nbsp;<em>And call no one on the earth your father-&nbsp;</em>Although the twelve called Jesus ‘Rabbi’, they perhaps didn’t respect Him initially as the&nbsp;<em>only</em>&nbsp;Rabbi -because the disciples were too influenced by Judaism. The Lord has to remind the disciples to call no man their rabbi or 'father' on earth, i:e. in the land, of Israel. The disciples were evidently still under the influence of Judaism and the religious world around them, and this background died hard for them. “Why say the scribes…?”, they reasoned (<em><a href='B:480 9:11'>Mar 9:11</a></em>), implying that their view was of at least equal if not greater weight when compared with that of the Lord Jesus as they also did in <em><a href='B:470 17:9-10'>Mat 17:9-10</a></em>. He had to specifically warn them against the Scribes in <em><a href='B:490 20:45-46'>Luk 20:45-46</a></em>. 'Father' was a common title for the rabbis, who referred to their disciples as their 'sons'. The disciples clearly respected the apostate rabbis far more than He wanted them to:&nbsp;We can easily overlook the deep and awesome significance of calling our fellow believers “brother” and “sister”. As Paul so strongly stresses, the Lord Jesus created a new sense of family, of “social identity”. We can easily miss how radical this was in first century Palestine; just as we can miss it in our own context. In the Mediterranean world of the first century, families were supremely important. The head of the family exercised total control. For the Lord to teach that His followers should call no man on earth their father was extreme; and yet He said it and expected it (<em><a href='B:470 23:9'>Mat 23:9</a></em>).</p><p><em>For one is your Father</em>-</p><p> This appeal to the unity of God would've sat well with the Jewish audience. But like many who profess faith in the One God, they hadn't thought through the implications. If God alone and uniquely is our Father, then we are not to call men 'Rabbi', rooted as the word was in the Hebrew word&nbsp;<em>ab</em>, 'father'.</p><p><em>He who is in Heaven-</em></p><p>&nbsp;If there is a Father in Heaven, we don't need a spiritual father upon earth. The implication is that they considered that although indeed there was one Father in Heaven, Heaven is distant and we need a father on earth. The Lord is implying that the King-dom, the rulership and essence of God in Heaven, is to be seen and felt on earth in our lives.</p>


text:
<p>23:10&nbsp;<em>Neither be called</em>-</p><p> The Lord has warned His people not to call their spiritual leaders by titles such as father or master, and now He addresses those who would become leaders, the nervous and wavering disciples, and urges them not to allow others to call them by these titles. Again, He foresaw how those weak men would soon be in a position where others would wish to give them these titles, and in so doing we have a window upon His hopefulness and vision, at a time when the material in His hands seemed so weak and immature.</p><p><em>Masters</em>-</p><p> The root word is used about leaders in the church: "Them which&nbsp;<em>have the rule over</em>&nbsp;you" (<em><a href='B:650 13:7'>Heb 13:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 13:17'>Heb 13:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 13:24'>Heb 13:24</a></em>); "He&nbsp;<em>that is chief</em>" amongst the believers should be as the servant (<em><a href='B:490 22:26'>Luk 22:26</a></em>); Paul was "the<em>&nbsp;chief</em>&nbsp;speaker" (<em><a href='B:510 14:17'>Act 14:17</a></em>), Barnabas and Silas were "<em>chief men</em>&nbsp;amongst the brethren" (<em><a href='B:510 15:22'>Act 15:22</a></em>). So the Lord is not teaching that there are not to be leaders; it is practically impossible in any case to have any community wherein all are identical and without leadership. But the Lord's point is that those in such positions should not be named as such, and should stop others calling them by such names. All in the community of faith should perceive Christ as the one ultimate Lord and Master, and in the light of that deep sense, all should see themselves as brethren on the same ultimate level with each other. One of the key factors in the apostasy of the early church was a failure to give due weight to the Lord's teaching here.</p><p><em>For one is your master, the Christ</em>-</p><p> Perhaps this was added by Matthew in brackets, as it were, seeing that the Lord never baldly calls Himself "the Christ" in so many words.</p>


text:
<p>23:11&nbsp;<em>But he that is greatest</em>-</p><p> The Lord spoke distinctly in the singular. Not 'Those who are the great ones', but the specific individual who is the greatest. Surely He had Himself in view.</p><p><em>Among you</em>-</p><p> Again, this is distinctly relevant to the Lord Jesus personally. He was soon to repeat these words with specific reference to Himself: "He that is greatest among you... He that is chief, as He that serves... I am&nbsp;<em>among you</em>&nbsp;as He that serves" (<em><a href='B:490 22:26-27'>Luk 22:26-27</a></em>). The idea of "among you" is an oblique reference to His humanity, as one of us.</p><p><em>Shall be your servant</em>-</p><p> The servant of Israel was the subject of Isaiah's servant songs, which came to their climax in the Lord's death upon the cross, prefigured by His washing the disciples' feet half naked as a servant, dressed as He would be at the time of His final death on the cross.</p>


text:
<p>23:12&nbsp;<em>And whosoever</em>-</p><p> The singular “greatest” person in view in :11 was the Lord Jesus; He was speaking of Himself, and in a sense speaking obliquely to Himself as well as to His immediate audience. But He now teaches that all in Him must pass through the same path of humiliation and exaltation. The same words for ‘abase’ and ‘exalt’ are used about all believers, e.g. “Humble yourselves s:w. ‘abase’ in the sight of the Lord, and He shall lift you up s:w. “exalt" (<em><a href='B:660 4:10'>Jas 4:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 5:6'>1Pe 5:6</a></em>). The Lord gave a parabolic example of what He meant when He also used the same words together about how the proud Pharisee would be “abased” and the convicted sinner ‘humbled himself’ and would later be ‘exalted’ (<em><a href='B:490 18:14'>Luk 18:14</a></em>). The Lord’s path of humiliation and exaltation is therefore to be that of us all; and <em><a href='B:570 2:4-12'>Phi 2:4-12</a></em> clearly applies this to His whole life and supremely to His death on the cross and exaltation subsequently. “He&nbsp;<em>humbled Himself&nbsp;</em>(s:w. ‘humble’ and ‘abase’ here in <em><a href='B:470 23:12'>Mat 23:12</a></em>)… unto death” (<em><a href='B:570 2:8'>Phi 2:8</a></em>). He there is therefore no longer a mere historical event, but rather a living pattern with which we engage throughout the progressive humiliation which the Lord’s hand brings upon us, so that we might be exalted in due time. This, in one sense, is what the paths of our lives are all about- progressive humiliation under His mighty hand, both pushing ourselves down and being pushed down.</p><p><em>Shall exalt himself</em>-</p><p> Again relevant to the Lord Jesus, who was highly exalted because of His servanthood. But He was exalted by God, not Himself (<em><a href='B:510 2:33'>Act 2:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 5:31'>Act 5:31</a></em> s:w:). And the very same word is used of the Lord's lifting up on the cross (<em><a href='B:500 3:14'>Joh 3:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 8:28'>Joh 8:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 12:32'>Joh 12:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 12:34'>Joh 12:34</a></em>). This was the true exaltation:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Shall be humbled</em>-</p><p> This is the very same word used in the next clause: “He that shall humble s:w. ‘abase’ himself…”. In the end, we are brought down. We are humbled by our own humanity and weakness. We either bring ourselves down, or God will bring us down. So we may as well humble ourselves so that we shall be exalted by God, rather than exalting ourselves so that God will eternally bring us down in condemnation at the last day. It’s humility, bringing down, either way. So certain is the connection between humility and exaltation that <em><a href='B:660 1:9'>Jas 1:9</a></em> can say that the brother who is ‘abased’ (AV “of low degree”)&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;exalted- in the eyes of the God who sees outside of our time, for whom all live unto Him even now.</p><p><em>And whoever shall humble himself shall be exalted-&nbsp;</em>God recognized Mary’s “low estate” humility and exalted her above all women (<em><a href='B:490 1:48'>Luk 1:48</a></em>), just as He would exalt His Son among men. The same Greek word is used in <em><a href='B:510 8:33'>Act 8:33</a></em>: “In his humiliation ‘low estate’ his judgment was taken away”. It occurs too in&nbsp; <em><a href='B:570 2:8'>Phi 2:8</a></em>: “He&nbsp;<em>humbled himself</em>”. In the cross, indeed throughout the seven stage self-humiliation of the Lord which Philippians 2 speaks of, He was living out the spirit of his mother. She taught him the life and the way of the cross. Hence the way she insisted on being there at the end, and the comfort she would have given Him, and the love He showed by asking for the only one who really understood Him to be taken away, for her sake as well as His own. The Lord directly alluded to His mother’s pattern of humiliation and exaltation by using the same word again here in <em><a href='B:470 23:12'>Mat 23:12</a></em>: “Whosever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself s:w. be abased- we must either humble ourselves or be humbled, it’s such a powerful logic shall be exalted”. Thus Jesus alludes to His mother's words in order to set her up as our pattern “whosoever”. And yet He Himself showed the ultimate obedience to her pattern in the death of the cross. For this and many other reasons,&nbsp;the Lord’s mind was upon His mother in His time of dying. And according to the Messianic Psalms, He even asks God to have mercy upon Him&nbsp;<em>for Mary’s sake</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:230 86:16'>Psa 86:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 116:16'>Psa 116:16</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p>23:13&nbsp;<em>But woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees. Hypocrites-</em></p><p>&nbsp;The Lord now utters seven woes, just as Isaiah had uttered seven woes after telling Judah the parable of the vineyard (<em><a href='B:290 5:8'>Isa 5:8</a></em> to <em><a href='B:290 6:5'>Isa 6:5</a></em>)- which the Lord had also recently done. Isaiah's woes were likewise uttered as a reflection of genuine Divine anger, but they were also a last ditch appeal to the Judah of Hezekiah's time to repent, lest the Assyrian invasion come and destroy them. Isaiah’s woes largely concerned the extremely fleshly behaviour of Judah at his time; the Lord’s woes concern religious hypocrisy of the apparently zealous, Torah-obedient Jews. The point is that religious hypocrisy, even if it involves careful obedience to some Divine principles, is just as wanton and fleshly as drunkenness and theft, the kinds of things criticized in Isaiah’s seven woes.</p><p><em>You lock up</em>-</p><p> The same figure of the door of the Kingdom being shut but by the Lord, not men is found in 25:10. The similarity is such that we may be intended to understand the foolish virgins are those who were locked out of the Kingdom because of the Pharisees. Their lack of oil, of personal spirituality, was because their religious leaders had not inculcated this in them, nor any sense of their own fallibility and frailty- in that the reason they ended up locked out of the Kingdom was because they had not considered that their oil would likely fail. The Pharisees had "the key of knowledge" (<em><a href='B:490 11:52'>Luk 11:52</a></em>) in a spiritually ignorant and illiterate society which depended upon them for knowledge of God's word. Likewise if the elders / judges of Israel had been wise, the entire people would have entered the land (<em><a href='B:50 16:20'>Deu 16:20</a></em>). The whole of Israel would’ve stayed in the wilderness and not entered the Kingdom / land if Gad and Reuben hadn’t initially gone over Jordan (<em><a href='B:40 32:15'>Num 32:15</a></em>). Wrath would come upon all Israel if the Levites weren’t encamped around the tabernacle (<em><a href='B:40 1:53'>Num 1:53</a></em>). We really can cause others to not enter God’s Kingdom by limiting their access to God’s word a sin of omission, or by making demands on them in the name of His Kingdom which are too heavy for them to bear a sin of commission. This imparts an urgency and eternal importance to all our interactions with others. No longer can we see the community of believers as a mere social club, nor the world around us as simply the dead furniture of our lives. We have their salvation or stumbling away from it within our power. This fact also denies us from assuming that whether we fail or not in our interactions with others, God will somehow make good our failures and save others anyway. He has delegated His work into our hands, and to some extent the degree to which it prospers or fails is our responsibility. Otherwise the whole language of delegation of His wealth into our hands is somehow meaningless:&nbsp;</p><p><em>You shut the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. For you neither enter yourselves</em>-</p><p> As if they slammed the door in the face of ones eager to enter the Kingdom:&nbsp;If we believe that we ourselves will be there, we will spark off an upward spiral of positive thinking in the community of believers with whom we are associated. Think carefully on the Lord’s words to the Pharisees: “For ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in” (<em><a href='B:470 23:13'>Mat 23:13</a></em>). If we don’t believe we will be there, we end up discouraging others.</p><p><em>Nor allow those who would enter to go in</em>-</p><p> The Greek&nbsp;<em>aphiemi</em>&nbsp;translated “allow” more commonly carries the idea of loosing, setting free, and is translated ‘forgive’. There may be a hint here at what the Lord also taught in chapter 18- that unforgiveness of others makes them stumble from entering the Kingdom. And the Pharisees with their endless demands upon men were indeed unforgiving. There is a sense in which we will enter the Kingdom at the last day (5:20; “Not every one that says Lord, Lord shall enter into the Kingdom”, <em><a href='B:470 7:21'>Mat 7:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 18:3'>Mat 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:10'>Mat 25:10</a></em> s:w:), and yet in another sense we are entering now through the gates (“enter in at the narrow gate”, <em><a href='B:470 7:13'>Mat 7:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 19:17'>Mat 19:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 19:24'>Mat 19:24</a></em>). Our lives now are on a path, a journey, which is entering the Kingdom. The significance of life and living could not be more intense.</p><p>Earlier when speaking these words, the Lord had said that the lawyers were ‘hindering’ those who were in the process of entering the Kingdom (<em><a href='B:490 11:52'>Luk 11:52</a></em>). The same word is used about how the disciples ‘forbad’ children to come to Jesus (<em><a href='B:470 19:14'>Mat 19:14</a></em>) and about ‘forbidding’ baptism (<em><a href='B:510 8:36'>Act 8:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 10:47'>Act 10:47</a></em>). This is exactly how people can be hindered or not ‘allowed’ to enter the Kingdom today- by refusing them baptism because of some inadequacy of knowledge or behaviour, or because they are simply felt to be in a category like “children” were by the disciples who are inappropriate for the Kingdom. These reflections make us realize that the Pharisees were not a mere phenomenon in history, but have their direct equivalents today.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:14'>Mat 23:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Woe to you Scribes and Pharisees. Hypocrites</em>-</p><p> They were totally fleshly people on the inside, but their acting involved the “pretence”, the&nbsp;<em>prophasis</em>&nbsp;or actor’s cloak, of making long prayers, appearing righteous on the outside. The Lord homes in upon such behaviour in the Sermon on the Mount- appearing to be spiritual when we are not is deeply angering to the Lord.</p><p><em>For you devour widow’s houses</em>-</p><p> I mentioned earlier that the language used here about the behaviour of the Scribes and Pharisees is elsewhere used about the righteous behaviour of the Lord and His followers; the Jewish leaders were living a religious life, but it was but a parody of true spirituality. The same words for “devour” and “house” are used of how the Lord Jesus was ‘eaten up’ or ‘devoured’ with zeal for His Father’s “house”. But by contrast the Scribes thought only of how they could devour the houses of widows, scheming how to get the house of a vulnerable single old woman left to them, and how they could devour that wealth upon themselves. We note that Mark and Luke conclude this section with the account of the widow who gave her entire wealth to the temple coffers (<em><a href='B:480 12:42'>Mar 12:42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 21:1'>Luk 21:1</a></em>). This was surely to add assurance that although her donation was misused, it was carefully noted by God to her eternal credit.</p><p><em>While for a pretence you make long prayers</em>-</p><p> See on&nbsp;<em>Hypocrites</em>. The word was used about an actor’s cloak, and thus connects with the theatrical term ‘hypocrites’, play-actors. The Lord uses the same word in <em><a href='B:500 15:22'>Joh 15:22</a></em>: “If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin; but now they have no&nbsp;<em>cloak</em>&nbsp;for their sin”. When did He come and speak unto the Jews about their hypocrisy? Surely here in Matthew 22. Although they did have a cloak for their sin before men, the Lord is saying in John 15 that they have no such cloak before Him:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Therefore you shall receive greater condemnation</em>-</p><p> There will be degrees of punishment, although it will be self-inflicted.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:15'>Mat 23:15</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 17:12'>Mat 17:12</a></em>:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees. Hypocrites For you compass sea and land to make one proselyte- Periago</em>&nbsp;("compass") is only elsewhere used in the Gospels of the Lord ‘walking around’ the villages around the sea of Galilee (<em><a href='B:470 4:23'>Mat 4:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 9:35'>Mat 9:35</a></em>). Again, their behaviour was a conscious inversion of his.</p><p><em>And when he has become so, you make him twofold more a son of Gehenna than yourselves</em>-</p><p> The condemnation of anyone is partly their fault, and partly the fault of others. They stopped people entering the Kingdom (:13) and thus made them inherit condemnation. This is the danger of legalism. Despite such huge missionary efforts and apparent devotion, imposing legalism upon others leads to their condemnation and the worse woe, therefore, upon the missionary. They made the person be condemned in that they had made him a proselyte. The same Greek word is used both times for “made”. By becoming a proselyte, the person became responsible to judgment and would be condemned. Here is proof enough that knowledge makes responsible to judgment. The Jews didn’t give men the good news of Christ and God’s grace; rather they gave only partial knowledge of the whole picture, of God’s demands upon men. They persuaded men to enter covenant relationship with Him, undertaking to keep His commandments, whilst not explaining grace and the love of God. And thereby they made those people condemned. This is just as easily done today in the preaching of a one-sided message which lacks any real Gospel, or good news of salvation by faith and grace.</p><p>In "twofold more" we again see the idea of degrees of punishment. The Lord has just said that the Pharisees would have greater condemnation than others (:14), and now He says that their converts would have double even that. Perhaps the implication of that is that these proselytes were not mere passive converts, but were inspired by the example of their teachers to be even more extreme in their legalism and lack of true faith. A case could be made that the Hellenistic Jews who persecuted Paul so fiercely were in fact Gentile proselytes. Reflect too how Saul was more obsessed against Christians than his teacher, the Pharisee Gamaliel. This is all so true to human observation, that the converts of legalists become typically even more fanatic than their spiritual fathers.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:16'>Mat 23:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Woe to you, you blind guides, who say: Whoever swears by the temple</em>-</p><p> Their blindness was a major source of criticism (:16,17,24,26). Paul uses the language of blind guides of the blind to the Jewish Christian believers in <em><a href='B:520 2:19'>Rom 2:19</a></em> - showing again that the mentality of the Pharisees is likely to be a problem for us all; we are failing to get the point if we read these woes upon them and feel somehow isolated from those men by time and culture. Their blindness was self-inflicted, otherwise it would not have been cause for rebuke. If someone doesn't want to see God's ways, then they never can see them, because the darkness in which they have chosen to mentally move has blinded them. </p><p><em>It is nothing</em>-</p><p> They were saying that an oath could be taken but breaking it was no problem if one ‘only’ swore by the temple. Jews swore by the temple because of their belief at the time that the temple was eternal. Because they broke their oaths and considered the temple to effectively be dispensable, therefore the Lord goes on in chapter 24 to predict the destruction of the temple:&nbsp;</p><p><em>But whoever swears by the gold of the temple</em>-</p><p> On the basis that that men swore by the greatest thing they could (<em><a href='B:650 6:13'>Heb 6:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 6:16'>Heb 6:16</a></em>), we have here an insight into their mind. For them, gold was paramount, for they were materialistic (<em><a href='B:490 16:14'>Luk 16:14</a></em>). And it was even more important than the temple and the God who dwelt there.</p><p><em>He is bound by his oath</em>-</p><p> This suggests that some oaths were binding and others were not. And thus a scale of honesty was created, whereby human words themselves were not significant, but were only given value according to how much they were underpinned by oaths. The Lord therefore taught that all such swearing was to be outlawed for His people (<em><a href='B:470 5:34-36'>Mat 5:34-36</a></em>). The word&nbsp;<em>opheilo</em>&nbsp;is used often in the Gospels but always in the context of the debt owed to God for human sin (<em><a href='B:470 18:28'>Mat 18:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 18:34'>Mat 18:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 7:41'>Luk 7:41</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 16:7'>Luk 16:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 17:10'>Luk 17:10</a></em>), and the debt of others to us for their sin against us (<em><a href='B:470 18:30'>Mat 18:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 11:4'>Luk 11:4</a></em>). Instead of judging to what degree others are bound / obligated to us for their sins, we are to frankly forgive, just as God frankly forgives our debts:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:17'>Mat 23:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You blind fools For which is greater, the gold, or the temple</em>-</p><p> The idea was that men swore by the greatest thing they could, which means that if they are going to swear at all, they should swear by God (<em><a href='B:650 6:13'>Heb 6:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 6:16'>Heb 6:16</a></em>). However, Jews didn’t like to swear by God, and so they had a whole range of things by which they swore- despite the fact that <em><a href='B:50 6:13'>Deu 6:13</a></em> clearly stated “You shall fear Yahweh… and shall swear by His Name”. An oath by the temple was “nothing”, but by the gold of the temple was even more. They were thereby effectively introducing a whole range of possible levels of honesty. Which the Lord had cut right through by insisting that our yes must be yes, without any oaths (<em><a href='B:470 5:34-36'>Mat 5:34-36</a></em>). James alludes to this by saying that “Above all&nbsp;things… swear not” (<em><a href='B:660 5:12'>Jas 5:12</a></em>). The importance of absolute truthfulness and not grading the honesty of our words is so important that James urges us to this “above all things”. Truthfulness with God, with others and within ourselves, is paramount. It is a reflection of our experience of God’s total and genuine forgiveness of us. In the forgiveness context, this spirit of truthfulness is what allows us to genuinely, from the heart forgive others not in word only but in feeling and reality.</p><p><em>That has made the gold sacred?</em>-</p><p> By so saying, the Lord reduced ‘gold’ to a mere metal of no intrinsic holiness outside the context of God’s service. The Pharisees, as many believers today, had isolated aspects of their religion and glorified them in themselves, forgetting the wider context. Thus it may be that a sister focuses on one particular aspect of service until it is out of all context, a brother may obsess about a specific Bible teaching out of all perspective with the rest of God’s revelation and intentions. But it’s doubtful that the temple of itself sanctified the gold within it- that isn’t a Biblical idea. See on :19&nbsp;<em>The altar that sanctifies the gift</em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:18'>Mat 23:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And, Whoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing</em>-</p><p> Their desire to define everything led them to downplay the significance of the altar because they were so concerned with the value of the sacrifice placed upon it. And yet <em><a href='B:20 29:37'>Exo 29:37</a></em> pronounced the altar to also be holy. Their penchant for definition led them to ignore the clearest statements in the Law they claimed to read, study and love to obey. Having spoken three times in the same section about “the altar” and “the temple”, it cannot be incidental that the Lord goes on to say that they had effectively slain Zacharias “between the temple and the altar” (:35). He is demonstrating that despite their hypersensitive interpretation of these things, they had committed sacrilege in those very places.</p><p><em>But whoever shall swear by the gift that is upon it, he is bound by his oath</em>-</p><p> Again we have an insight into how the Pharisees thought. Gifts to the temple were all important to them, because those gifts were effectively their income:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:19'>Mat 23:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You blind men For which is greater: the gift</em>-</p><p> The fact the Lord rebukes them for their blindness shows that blindness is in this sense their choice. I would suggest that much erroneous understanding is a result of people choosing not to understand, rather than having some genuinely excusable intellectual blockage.</p><p><em>Or the altar that makes the gift sacred?</em>-</p><p> The Lord had earlier taught that a gift brought to the altar was unacceptable if the offerer was not first reconciled to his brother (<em><a href='B:470 5:23-24'>Mat 5:23-24</a></em>). But as so often, He uses their reasoning and for a moment, argues as if it were true. If they considered that the altar sanctified the gift, then effectively there was a unity between the sacrifice and the altar. To draw a distinction between oaths made by the altar and those made by the sacrifice upon it was therefore utterly a false distinction. The Lord could have argued that oaths should only be made by God, in line with <em><a href='B:50 6:13'>Deu 6:13</a></em>. Or He could have reiterated His position that our yes should mean yes, and therefore there was no need for any swearing by anything (<em><a href='B:470 5:34-36'>Mat 5:34-36</a></em>). But we note&nbsp;<em>how</em>&nbsp;He argues here- He uses their wrong ideas and works with them to demonstrate ultimately how they were misplaced and wrong. He does the same in using the language of demons. Instead of a bald declaration of truth, He worked with people from where they were. Far too often, bald declarations of truth are presented in a way which can only alienate, and is more for the benefit of the speaker than the audience. It all comes down to whether we genuinely wish to lead a person onwards, for their benefit; or whether we are involved in the whole interchange for our own self-justification and benefit.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:20'>Mat 23:20</a></em><em>&nbsp;He therefore that swears by the altar, swears by it and by all things on it-&nbsp;</em>The Lord is criticizing the distinction made by the Jews between swearing by the altar, and swearing by the sacrifice; or swearing by the temple, and swearing by the gold placed in the temple treasury. If a man swore by the temple or by the altar, those things could not be taken up if he was found to be telling untruth. But if he swore by the sacrifice or donation of gold he had made, those things could be seized.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:21'>Mat 23:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And he that swears by the temple, swears by it and by Him</em>-</p><p> The Lord's point here and in :22 was that effectively, the Pharisees were doing what they were trying hard not to do, i:e. swearing by God. And yet <em><a href='B:50 6:13'>Deu 6:13</a></em> had commanded that oaths should be sworn by God, and <em><a href='B:30 19:12'>Lev 19:12</a></em> implies that too, in warning against swearing falsely by God. There is no suggestion that oaths were to be sworn by anything else. This was the point of the commandment not to take the Name of God in vain (<em><a href='B:20 20:7'>Exo 20:7</a></em>). Abraham swore by God (<em><a href='B:10 14:22-23'>Gen 14:22-23</a></em>); the formula was typically "as Yahweh lives" (<em><a href='B:70 8:19'>Jdg 8:19</a></em>). The Jews tried to avoid this, placing the sacrifice, gold, temple and altar in some kind of varied scale of solemnity. But the Lord's point is that effectively, they were swearing by God. The lesson is that all such careful, legalistic attempts to place a respectable distance between God and ourselves in the matter of honesty are foolish and irrelevant. In reality, the Jews were breaking one of the ten commandments, by taking God's Name in vain. And this was the very commandment they were so careful to apparently obey by not even mentioning or pronouncing the tetragrammaton. The Lord's earlier command in <em><a href='B:470 5:34'>Mat 5:34</a></em> not to swear could be read as meaning that people were not to swear by the things they were swearing by at the time (heaven, earth, Jerusalem, your head), but only by God. But seeing God knows all things, the Lord is saying that our yes should be yes, for effectively all that we say is said before God:&nbsp;</p><p><em>That dwells in it</em>-</p><p> The Lord goes on to say that the house of the Lord was no longer God's house but "your house", and it was 'left desolate' (:38). The glory had departed from it, just as God's shekinah presence is depicted in Ezekiel as progressively departing from the temple. And yet again the Lord is using their own beliefs against themselves. If they believed that God still dwelt in the temple, then the gold in its treasury, the altar and sacrifices were all equally connected with Him. Note that “Him that dwells” in the sanctuary / Most Holy (<em><a href='B:470 23:21'>Mat 23:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 23:35'>Mat 23:35</a></em> RVmg:) could be a reference to an Angel who dwelt there- see <em><a href='B:230 78:60'>Psa 78:60</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:22'>Mat 23:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And he that swears by heaven, swears by the throne of God and by</em>-</p><p> To draw a distinction between swearing by Heaven and swearing by God personally was purely academic. Earlier the Lord had clearly stated that there is practically no difference between Heaven and God: "Heaven... is God's throne" (<em><a href='B:470 5:34'>Mat 5:34</a></em>). We note, however, that Matthew often uses "Heaven" as a synonym for God, using language in a way which makes concession to Jewish sensitivities, even though they were mistaken. The use of the language of demons for unexplained illnesses is another example. The Lord could have simply quoted from the Old Testament, as Stephen did: "Heaven is My throne" (<em><a href='B:510 7:49'>Act 7:49</a></em>). But instead He works with the false distinction they were making to show it to be false, instead of head on confronting them with the error of their thinking by Biblical quotation. And in that He sets us an example. The Lord's point is that all oaths are before God because He sees all things. The distinctions being drawn by the Pharisees were pathetic efforts to distance man from God in terms of personal responsibility to Him. Whilst we may shake our heads at their intellectual vanity and desperation, we practically do the same within the deepest levels of human psychology. For we too can assume that somehow God is not present, we are not held to be utterly truthful, because of some get out clause of our own creation and imagination. But His omnipresence means that there are no such separations to be made, nor distances to be placed, between God and man. We are directly responsible to Him, in His presence. See on :26.</p><p><em>Him that sits on it</em>-</p><p> A clear invitation to conceive of God as a personal corporeal being having specific location.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:23'>Mat 23:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Woe to you Scribes and Pharisees. Hypocrites For you tithe</em>-</p><p> The Greek can equally mean to both take or receive tithes. They demanded and perhaps paid themselves tithes on absolutely everything:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Mint and anise and cumin</em>-</p><p> These plants grew on windowsills, and a tenth of their 'crop' would've been very light in weight. The lightness of the 'crop' is contrasted with the 'heavier' things which were required of believers. Again, the Lord could've deployed convincing Biblical arguments that the tithe was to be paid from harvested crops, and given to the Levites / priests- not the Pharisees. For they were not the same as the priests. There is no hint in the Mosaic legislation that a tenth of such things was to be given to support the livelihood of the priests. But the Lord goes along with their position- and doesn't say they should not do this. Rather He lifts the issue to a higher and 'heavier' level. In engagement with those who wilfully misunderstand Scripture, it's easy to present a strictly Biblical case which demolishes their position. And the Lord could so easily have done this in the matter of tithing kitchen herbs. But He doesn't. He simply raises weightier issues and principles:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Yet have left undone</em>-</p><p> The Greek&nbsp;<em>aphiemi</em>&nbsp;occurs three times in this verse; clearly a word play is intended. For the Lord concludes the sentence by saying: "... and not to leave&nbsp;<em>aphiemi</em>&nbsp;the other undone&nbsp;<em>aphiemi</em>". And He uses it again at the end of His speech: "Your house is left&nbsp;<em>aphiemi</em>&nbsp;unto you desolate" (:38), and there would therefore not be left&nbsp;<em>aphiemi</em>&nbsp;one stone upon another in that temple / house (<em><a href='B:470 24:2'>Mat 24:2</a></em>); not one part of the masonry would be omitted or overlooked, every stone would be thrown down. They had omitted the weightier matters of justice etc:, thinking they were justified in this because they did not omit to tithe kitchen herbs. But the Lord is saying that effectively they&nbsp;<em>had</em>&nbsp;omitted "the other", the tithing of kitchen herbs; they had omitted what they had omitted. The double use of&nbsp;<em>aphiemi</em>&nbsp;in the last clause is to give the sense of how totally they had omitted&nbsp;<em>aphiemi</em>&nbsp;"the other", the tithing of kitchen herbs. So although they did tithe them, effectively they had not done so. Because they had omitted the weightier matters of justice, mercy and faith. So they tithed, but they did not tithe. Just as we can pray, but not pray; think we believe, when we do not; forgive, when we do not really; read God's word, when we do not really do so as the Lord often pointed out to them in saying "Have you never read…?", when clearly on one level they had read. Omitting justice, mercy and faith meant that their tithing of the small stuff was also omitted, in God's final view of them. The spiritual life is intended to be all encompassing, it's not a case of a series of specific obediences to a long list of specific commandments, whereby our omission of the heavier issues is compensated for by our commission of the lighter issues. And this again is a challenge to us all; for surveying God's expectations of us, we can so easily cut ourselves slack in some areas because we feel we are being obedient in others. Thus the failure of the Pharisees in this becomes not something to merely shake our heads at, but a challenge to our deepest internal reasonings in our own walk before God:&nbsp;</p><p><em>The weightier matters of the law</em>-</p><p> The heavy burdens tied on men by the Pharisees were in fact relating to the lighter matters s:w. :4 "heavy burdens". Clearly the Lord saw there was a variation in God's requirements, ranging from light to heavy. This of course was and is anathema to any legalistic mind, who sees obedience to specific statements as paramount. The Lord is trying to show that life before God is lived in a spirit of life in which omitting the weightier matters means that specific obedience to the lighter matters is thereby rendered void:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Justice, mercy</em>-</p><p> These were "matters of the Law", these were what the various specific commandments of the Mosaic Law sought to inculcate. Why these three matters? Mercy is part of justice, in that justice must be shown with mercy if we have any awareness of our own moral frailty (<em><a href='B:660 2:13'>Jas 2:13</a></em>); just as God integrates mercy with justice in His judgment of men. Mercy and justice are what David praises God for (<em><a href='B:230 89:14'>Psa 89:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 101:1'>Psa 101:1</a></em>). God's judgment of men is connected with His mercy (<em><a href='B:290 16:5'>Isa 16:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 30:18'>Isa 30:18</a></em>), and human judgment of situations must likewise be a mixture of justice and mercy (<em><a href='B:350 12:6'>Hos 12:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 7:9'>Zec 7:9</a></em>). But to exercise these things requires faith- faith that God's judgment of us and others is mixed with mercy. For those like the Pharisees with no sense of their own sins and experience of God's judgment-mercy, this was all a foreign language, just as it is for the many self-righteous legalists of today. Our calling is to reflect God's mixture of justice and mercy on the basis of our own experience of it, and this was the intention of the entire legal apparatus of the Mosaic law.</p><p><em>And faith. These you ought to have done, and not to have left the other undone-&nbsp;</em>Faith is something which ought to be 'done', the Lord is teaching. Faith never exists alone. James argues that there is no essential difference between faith and works. 'Faith' is not just credulity or a vague feeling of hope, but an active, driving force. There is "the work of faith" (<em><a href='B:590 1:3'>1Th 1:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 1:11'>2Th 1:11</a></em>). Knowledge and faith are paralleled in John's thought (<em><a href='B:500 8:32'>Joh 8:32</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:470 14:1'>Mat 14:1</a></em>; cp. <em><a href='B:470 11:27'>Mat 11:27</a></em>)- in stark contrast to this world's emphasis upon works rather than faith. Hence Isaiah's appeals to&nbsp;<em>know</em>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<em>believe</em>&nbsp;Yahweh (<em><a href='B:290 43:10'>Isa 43:10</a></em>); and the Lord's parallel of 'little faith' with little understanding (<em><a href='B:470 16:7-8'>Mat 16:7-8</a></em>):&nbsp;<em>Pistis</em>, one of the NT words for 'faith', is translated in the LXX as both 'faith' (e.g. <em><a href='B:50 32:20'>Deu 32:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 12:22'>Pro 12:22</a></em>) and 'truth' (<em><a href='B:240 12:17'>Pro 12:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 14:22'>Pro 14:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 5:1'>Jer 5:1</a></em>). Indeed, another word used in the LXX is 119 times translated 'truth' and 26 times 'faith'. There&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;a connection between true knowledge of the Gospel and faith. And this faith is the basis for our works. We don't just learn the propositions of the one faith before baptism, and forget them. The triumphant spiritual life&nbsp;<em>lives them out</em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:24'>Mat 23:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You blind guides</em>-</p><p> That they were “guides” is a repeated reason why the Lord condemns them. This is because they were leading others to condemnation. We play a larger part than we currently can ever imagine in either the salvation or stumbling of others, and this fact of itself should impart to all our interactions a seriousness and intensity. On one hand, deeply sensitive to whether a course of action will cause another to stumble, and on the other, ever reaching out to others with the possibilities of the Kingdom and forgiveness.</p><p><em>That strain out the gnat and swallow the camel</em>-</p><p> Gnats lived on camels, so this is a picture of how extremely these highly religious men had utterly missed the point. And remember that they were members of the ecclesia of their day, the people of God. <em><a href='B:370 6:6'>Amo 6:6</a></em> (LXX) condemns a similar Israel as those "which drink strained wine". The Pharisees would’ve been shocked by this direct association made between them and apostate Israel of Old Testament times. The context of Amos 6 is about the forthcoming destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple for the sake of the materialism of Israel’s leaders.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:25'>Mat 23:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Woe to you Scribes and Pharisees. Hypocrites For you cleanse</em>-</p><p> The Lord Jesus is described using the same word as making others clean (<em><a href='B:470 8:2-3'>Mat 8:2-3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 10:8'>Mat 10:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 11:5'>Mat 11:5</a></em>). The Pharisees were concerned with making&nbsp;<em>themselves&nbsp;</em>look clean externally. Again, they are a parody of the Lord. He was concerned with making&nbsp;<em>others</em>&nbsp;clean, and really clean. This tension, between making ourselves look clean and making others clean, is highly relevant to us all. For there is such a thing as being spiritually selfish.</p><p><em>The outside</em>-</p><p> The tension between outside and inside, along with the idea of cleanliness, is to be found in the Lord’s earlier teaching in <em><a href='B:480 7:15'>Mar 7:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 7:18'>Mar 7:18</a></em>. Nothing on the&nbsp;<em>outside</em>&nbsp;can defile a man, it is the&nbsp;<em>inside</em>&nbsp;, the thoughts, which must be cleansed. If we ask&nbsp;<em>why</em>&nbsp;there is a desire for good appearances externally, the answer may not simply be ‘so as to look good to others’. It can also partly be a recognition of our own inner defilement and our sense that we ought to be doing something about it. Peter explores the same tension in <em><a href='B:670 3:3'>1Pe 3:3</a></em>, teaching that a woman should not focus on&nbsp;<em>outside</em>&nbsp;s:w. adorning, but not on&nbsp;<em>internal</em>&nbsp;attitudes. He’s not saying that ‘outward adornment’ is wrong of itself, but rather that her focus should be on&nbsp;<em>inner</em>&nbsp;spirituality rather than focusing on the&nbsp;<em>external</em>&nbsp;to the exclusion of the&nbsp;<em>internal</em>. Thus obsession with external cosmetic issues, and literal cosmetics, can likely be a running away from internal issues which need serious addressing. So often pedantic attitudes to externalities conceal insecurity, and in spiritual terms, that insecurity is a reflection of disbelief that the inner conscience has been cleansed of sin in Christ.</p><p><em>Of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion-&nbsp;</em>The plate and cup refer to the Pharisees personally. The picture is of silverware being cleansed and shining outwardly, whilst it contains unclean things within. “Even so&nbsp;<em>you also</em>&nbsp;outwardly appear righteous” (:28). And <em><a href='B:490 11:39'>Luk 11:39</a></em> is clearer: “<em>Your&nbsp;</em>inward part is full of ravening Gk. ‘extortion’ and wickedness Gk. ‘plots’”. They were ever scheming how to get money out of people. But why choose these two items as examples? The presence of the article both times,&nbsp;<em>the</em>&nbsp;cup and&nbsp;<em>the&nbsp;</em>plate, suggest they have specific relevance. The Gospels were written as the handbook for the early Christian converts and ecclesias. They would largely have been recited or read at the breaking of bread meetings. It’s hard therefore to avoid the reference to the memorial cup and plate of the communion meetings. And again, the warning comes so close to home. The memorial meeting is the time to look within, at the likely wickedness within us, rather than appearing in our Sunday best and making ourselves shine externally.</p><p><em>And excess</em>-</p><p> The Greek suggests complete lack of restraint. And here is the paradox. The most rule-governed people were actually without any sense of restraint. Obedience to rules, and elevating rules, does not of itself mean we are restrained. It can mean the very opposite.</p><p>Time and again Paul warns his brethren not to behave like the Pharisees did in various incidents in the Gospels (e.g. <em><a href='B:470 23:4'>Mat 23:4</a></em> = <em><a href='B:510 15:10'>Act 15:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 23:25'>Mat 23:25</a></em> Gk. = <em><a href='B:530 7:5'>1Co 7:5</a></em>, where Paul is saying 'If you lust inwardly but outwardly appear to have rejected marriage for the sake of the Gospel, you're like those condemned Pharisees). Let it be noted that the danger of Pharisaism, of spiritual hypocrisy, of adopting a hard line on issues which in essence we too fail in, was a great theme with Paul.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:26'>Mat 23:26</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You blind Pharisee Cleanse first the inside of the cup and of the plate</em>-</p><p> What was within them was a ravening (<em><a href='B:470 7:15'>Mat 7:15</a></em>) for material gain and plotting to obtain it (<em><a href='B:490 11:39'>Luk 11:39</a></em>), extortion and lack of self-restraint (:25). There was of course no prescription in the Mosaic legislation for cleansing internal attitudes. But the Lord’s command for them to cleanse these things surely suggests they were to think harder about what the sacrificial blood of cleansing might represent. The argument of <em><a href='B:650 9:9-14'>Heb 9:9-14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:2'>Heb 10:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:22'>Heb 10:22</a></em> is that the blood of Mosaic sacrifices could not cleanse from such internal conscience of sin- but the blood of Christ can. The Lord’s command for them to “cleanse” their inner parts could therefore find no opportunity for fulfilment within their legal framework. But the language would’ve recalled David’s need to be cleansed in the inward parts after his sins relating to Bathsheba (<em><a href='B:230 51:2'>Psa 51:2</a></em>). His request for cleansing was met by God’s direct operation on his heart, because as he was aware, there was no prescribed sacrifice which could address his need. The scribes and Pharisees were surely intended to realize that they must ask God for special cleansing; and yet they knew that blood played some role in cleansing. Therefore they were intended to come to the conclusion that God could indeed cleanse them, but through some special sacrifice. The priests and Pharisees who later converted to Christ perhaps followed this path of logic to where the Lord intended it to lead (<em><a href='B:510 6:7'>Act 6:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 15:5'>Act 15:5</a></em>). His hopefulness in people finally paid off- setting us a great example.</p><p><em>That the outside of it of it may become clean also</em>-</p><p> There is a jarring element of unreality here. Cleaning the inside of a cup doesn’t make the outside clean. But that is the jump of faith required. The inside is the outside- in God’s eyes. This reasoning continues the theme that ‘God sees all things’ which the Lord has developed in :22; see on <em><a href='B:470 23:22'>Mat 23:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>By Heaven</em>:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p>23:27&nbsp;<em>Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees. Hypocrites For you are like whitewashed tombs</em>-</p><p> A month before Passover, the graves were painted white so that the pilgrims coming to keep the feast would not be defiled. This was therefore something fresh in everyone’s minds, for the Lord was speaking at Passover time. Earlier the Lord had used the opposite figure about them: "You are as graves which appear not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of them" (<em><a href='B:490 11:44'>Luk 11:44</a></em>). It was as if they had not whitened / cleansed themselves before Passover as was required. And so again we see the idea that they led men into defilement.</p><p><em>Which outwardly appear</em>-</p><p> S:w. 6:16 “That they may&nbsp;<em>appear</em>&nbsp;unto men to be fasting”:&nbsp;</p><p><em>But inwardly are full of dead men's bones and of all uncleanness-&nbsp;</em>The idea of being inwardly ‘full’ of unclean thinking is found likewise in :25: “<em>Full</em>&nbsp;of extortion and excess”. Only from God’s perspective is this apparent. We tend to perceive elements of spirituality and also of unspirituality co-existing within a person. But ultimately, in God’s judgment, the inner heart is either fully for Him or against Him, dead or alive in spiritual terms. They are full of “<em>all</em>&nbsp;uncleanness”. The language is in absolute, total terms:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Bones</em>-</p><p> Perhaps a reference to the spiritually dead house of Israel being likened to dead bones in <em><a href='B:330 37:1-11'>Eze 37:1-11</a></em>, awaiting the coming of the spirit of the new covenant.</p>


text:
<p>23:28&nbsp;<em>Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men</em>-</p><p> This is the language of <em><a href='B:90 16:7'>1Sa 16:7</a></em>. Man looks on the outside, but God looks within. And within the Pharisees was not a pretty sight.</p><p><em>But inwardly you are full of hypocrisy</em>-</p><p> We would imagine that the language of hypocrisy was more relevant to their outward appearance than to their internal state. But they were hypocrites&nbsp;<em>within</em>, meaning that they deceived their own selves within, wearing masks within their own hearts to deceive themselves that they were actually righteous. The Lord Jesus perceptively commented that hypocrisy is something which is&nbsp;<em>within</em>-</p><p> it's about acting out a role&nbsp;<em>inside</em>&nbsp;ourselves, a split personality&nbsp;<em>within</em>&nbsp;a person, whereby they kid themselves they are someone whom they are not. Their real self and their shadow self are in conflict deep within their minds, in their own self-perceptions they act one way when their real self is something different. And this all goes on&nbsp;<em>within</em>&nbsp;the human mind. Hence Paul speaks of hypocrisy being essentially a lie which is told within the mind, and parallels it with a conscience which no longer functions properly (<em><a href='B:610 4:2'>1Ti 4:2</a></em>). The Lord's definition of hypocrisy therefore concerned an internal state of mind- and He warned that this is a yeast which inevitably spreads to others (<em><a href='B:490 12:1'>Luk 12:1</a></em>). Thus Barnabas was carried away into hypocrisy by the hypocrisy of others (<em><a href='B:550 2:13'>Gal 2:13</a></em>). Although it's so deeply internal, the dissonance between the real self and the portrayed self that goes on&nbsp;<em>within</em>&nbsp;human minds somehow becomes a spirit which influences others. And that's how society has become so desperately hypocritical. <em><a href='B:660 5:12'>Jas 5:12</a></em> gives some good practical advice in all this- our yes should mean yes and our no should be no, or else we will fall into hypocrisy (Gk:- AV "condemnation" is a terribly misleading translation). James seems to be saying that we can guard against falling into the hypocritical life and mindset by ensuring that our words, feeling and intentions are directly and simply stated, with meaning to the words, with congruence between our real self and the words we speak.</p><p><em>And iniquity</em>-</p><p> The Greek&nbsp;<em>anomia</em>&nbsp;means literally ‘not law’, without law. These religious scrupulous legalists were in fact moral anarchists, with no law. This is the great paradox of legalism, to the point that it could be argued that legalism is in fact a cover for internal moral lawlessness. This would explain the otherwise staggering moral hypocrisy, double standards and depth of moral failure observed in the lives of so many legalists. Their external legalism is a cover for their own internal moral anarchy and lack of law and self-restraint.</p>


text:
<p>23:29&nbsp;<em>Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees. Hypocrites For you build the tombs of the prophets</em>-</p><p>&nbsp;<em>Oikodomeo</em>&nbsp;means not only to build but carries the sense of ‘to confirm’, and is also translated in the NT in this sense. On one hand, building the tombs of the prophets was a sign of respect, but the Lord read it negatively, as if by doing so they were confirming the decision to murder them made by their forefathers. We have here an example of where the same action can be judged positively or negatively by the Lord; and this of itself disproves the mentality of salvation by works. Because it depends with what motive or background attitude the works are done, and this decides whether the work was an act of righteousness or a sin. And this is a further warning against the impossibility of judging another’s works. For we fail to see those background, internal attitudes behind the work. See on 23:30&nbsp;<em>Our fathers</em>.</p><p><em>And garnish</em>-</p><p> The same word is soon to be used of how the temple was ‘garnished’ (<em><a href='B:490 21:5'>Luk 21:5</a></em>), and the Lord predicted its utter destruction. In the Lord’s teaching, it is the inner mind which must be “garnished” (12:44), the lamp of our own spirituality must likewise be “trimmed” (s:w:; 25:7). Again we see a tension between the Lord’s focus upon the internal, and their attention to the external.</p><p><em>The tombs of the righteous</em>-</p><p> The same word has just been used in :28, where the Lord observes that the Pharisees tried to “appear righteous unto men”. And they accordingly made a great show of tending the graves of “the righteous”. The implication is therefore that they saw righteousness in terms of imitating ‘the righteous’ who had gone before them. The whole thrust of the New Testament is concerning imputed righteousness, not attaining righteousness in the eyes of others by our own imitations of men. The idea that righteousness involves modelling some past religious leader of our denomination is not at all dead in these days.</p>


text:
<p>23:30&nbsp;<em>And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers</em>-</p><p> The Lord takes their use of this phrase and reasons that they were thereby calling themselves the descendants of those who had killed the prophets, and were therefore guilty. That may seem a very harsh analysis and judgment. But the Lord has the power to see meaning in words for good or for bad. All&nbsp;<em>we</em>&nbsp;hear are the words, and we cannot judge words alone, because we cannot see the background motivation behind them. See on 23:29&nbsp;<em>You build</em>.</p><p><em>We would not have been partners with them in shedding the blood of the prophets</em>-</p><p> Blood is here put by metonymy for ‘death’, and this explains how the term “The blood of Christ” refers not so much to the red liquid of His blood, but to His death.</p>


text:
<p>23:31- see on 15:2.</p><p><em>Therefore you witness to yourselves-&nbsp;</em>AV "Witnesses against yourselves<em>":&nbsp;</em>The rejected are witnesses against themselves (<em><a href='B:290 44:9'>Isa 44:9</a></em>). Herein lies the crass folly and illogicality of sin. Jeremiah pleaded with Israel: "Wherefore commit ye this great evil against your souls i:e. yourselves, to cut off from you man and woman... that ye might cut yourselves off" (<em><a href='B:300 44:7-8'>Jer 44:7-8</a></em>, cp. how Jerusalem cut her own hair off in <em><a href='B:300 7:29'>Jer 7:29</a></em>). In the same passage, Yahweh is the one who does the cutting off (<em><a href='B:300 44:11'>Jer 44:11</a></em>); but they had cut themselves off. Likewise as they had kindled fire on their roofs in offering sacrifices to Baal, so Yahweh through the Babylonians would set fire to those same houses (<em><a href='B:300 32:29'>Jer 32:29</a></em>). And note the present tense of the Lord’s words here. In that the judgment process is now ongoing, we&nbsp;<em>are right now&nbsp;</em>witnesses against ourselves when we sin. And we are not only witnesses, but also the judge who pronounces the verdict of condemnation: for the sinner is condemned&nbsp;<em>of himself&nbsp;</em>(<em><a href='B:630 3:11'>Tit 3:11</a></em>). In this lies the illogicality of sin and the utter blindness of man to the implications of his actions before God. They right now fulfil or live out the judgment of the wicked (<em><a href='B:220 36:17'>Job 36:17</a></em>).</p><p><em>You are the sons of them that slew the prophets</em>-</p><p>&nbsp;The idea of being a ‘son of’ someone or something meant to be in agreement with them, or to be a disciple of them. Again, this seems an example of imputing iniquity. Their usage of the term “our fathers” was taken by the Lord to mean that they ‘allowed’ or Gk. ‘had pleasure in’ the murder of the prophets (<em><a href='B:490 11:48'>Luk 11:48</a></em>). But the same words “our fathers” are used by Paul to describe his faithless Israelite forbears- and he is not condemned for it (<em><a href='B:530 10:1'>1Co 10:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 28:25'>Act 28:25</a></em>). Clearly, the same words can be used by men with different background meanings, and this is seen by God and His Son. But all we hear are the words- we cannot therefore judge them.</p>


text:
<p>23:32&nbsp;<em>Fill up</em>-</p><p> The language of the iniquity of the Amorites filling up to a point where they would be cast out of Canaan (<em><a href='B:10 15:16'>Gen 15:16</a></em>). The Lord is saying that the Jewish legalists were no better than the Gentile inhabitants of the land, and they would be cast out of the same land, to make way for a new Israel, largely comprised of Gentiles. God is not insensitive to sin; the account builds up to a point where He will openly act. The question is whether the Lord was commanding / encouraging them to ‘fill up’ this measure of sin by going ahead and crucifying Him, or whether He was merely commenting that they were filling up that measure of sin which would bring Divine judgment. If He is encouraging them to go ahead and fill up the measure of sin required of them, then we have here another insight into how the Lord as it were provoked His own final arrest and death, in the sense that He consciously gave His life rather than having it taken from Him. His parody of a triumphant entry into Jerusalem so broke and disappointed Jewish expectations of Him that it could be argued that He was purposefully moving the crowds to turn their misplaced love for Him into hatred, and join forces with the Jewish leadership in killing Him.</p><p>The comparison between them and the Gentile Amorites is part of a wider theme, in which those among God's people who break their covenant with Him, He sees as the world. Thus Moses prophesied of an apostate Israel: "They have dealt corruptly with God, they are no longer his children because of their blemish; they are a perverse and crooked generation" (<em><a href='B:50 32:5'>Deu 32:5</a></em> RSV). These very words are used by Paul regarding the Gentile world (<em><a href='B:570 2:15'>Phi 2:15</a></em>). Likewise <em><a href='B:290 42:1-2'>Isa 42:1-2</a></em> concerning Christ's witness to the&nbsp;<em>Gentiles</em>&nbsp;is quoted in <em><a href='B:470 12:19'>Mat 12:19</a></em> regarding His witness to an apostate Israel. Israel were to be made like “the top of a rock” just as Gentile Tyre would be (<em><a href='B:330 24:7'>Eze 24:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 26:4'>Eze 26:4</a></em>). Pharaoh's heart was hardened to bring about God's glory, but Paul uses the very same language, in the same context, to describe what was happening to an apostate, Egypt-like Israel (<em><a href='B:520 9:17'>Rom 9:17</a></em>). Korah and his company were swallowed by the earth, using the very language which Moses so recently had applied to how the Egyptians were swallowed by the earth at the Red Sea (<em><a href='B:20 15:12'>Exo 15:12</a></em>).</p><p><em>Then the measure of your fathers' iniquity</em>-</p><p> The Lord elsewhere uses the figure of a measure to describe final judgment. With the measure we measure, it will be measured to us in that day (<em><a href='B:470 7:2'>Mat 7:2</a></em>). So the Lord could be urging them to go ahead and fill up the required level of sin to bring about on&nbsp;<em>them</em>&nbsp;the judgment due to their fathers. For this is His teaching in :35- that judgment for all the righteous blood shed by Israel’s leaders was to come upon that generation. This may appear to contradict the principle that the sons shall not suffer for the fathers’ sins. But the Lord seems to be saying that there is also another dimension to the picture, and that is the principle of imputed sin to those who repeat the sins of their fathers:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:33'>Mat 23:33</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You serpents, you offspring of vipers</em>-</p><p> A clear reference to them as the seed of the serpent (<em><a href='B:10 3:15'>Gen 3:15</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p><em>How shall you escape the judgment of Gehenna?</em>-</p><p> The Lord's whole attitude to Israel showed that they could be saved from condemnation, even at the very last minute. And this was clearly His will. So rather than seeing this as spoken in anger as the final invective against a deeply wayward nation, I am inclined to see this as spoken with a voice cracking under the passion of wanting to save the beloved who hates their Saviour. And surely there was a rhetorical element to it. How they could escape it was to ditch their plans to crucify Him. And the Lord goes straight on in <em><a href='B:470 24:16'>Mat 24:16</a></em> to say that even when judgment started to come upon Jerusalem and the temple, they could “escape to the mountains” (s:w:). This was how they could literally escape the coming condemnation; which suggests that surely the Lord did have an appealing, rhetorical sense to His question here. The similarity with that clause in the Olivet prophecy is really a marvel of grace. They who deserved instant death were being given grace upon grace, every chance to change the outcome of their wicked ways. Further, the Lord is quoting here from the words of John the Baptist: “O generation of vipers, who has warned you to flee s:w. “escape” from the wrath to come?” (<em><a href='B:490 3:7'>Luk 3:7</a></em>). “All Jerusalem”, including the Scribes and Pharisees, had initially heard John approvingly. The Lord is surely saying that the way to escapee the coming condemnation was by doing what John had taught- to repent and accept Jesus as Messiah and Saviour from sin. Again, the Lord’s quotation of John’s words confirms that He is speaking rhetorically and seeking their repentance and salvation, even at that late hour.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:34'>Mat 23:34</a></em><em>&nbsp;Therefore, look, I send to you prophets and wise men and scribes. Some of them you shall kill and crucify, and some of them you shall scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city-&nbsp;</em>This certainly sounds like a quotation from extant literature; <em><a href='B:490 11:49'>Luk 11:49</a></em> introduces it with: “Therefore also said the wisdom of God”. The Lord Jesus was indeed “the wisdom of God” (<em><a href='B:530 1:24'>1Co 1:24</a></em>), and so it could be that the Gospel writers were pointing out that these words of Jesus were a proof text amongst their persecuted converts. Certainly the Lord’s words here would’ve been a good mission statement for the early church. Or it could be that the Lord is quoting some now unknown text with approval. There can be no doubt that every part of the verse has direct relevance to the first century witness to the Jews. The source of the quotation is therefore of secondary importance; the Lord places it in His own mouth, at any rate, in predicting the outcome of the great commission. And yet clearly enough, at the time He spoke these words, that bunch of mixed up, largely secular men, who misunderstood so much, who knew so little, and whose ideals were so misplaced, were far from being the preaching machine which the Lord’s words imply here. We can take one simple lesson from this- He had a profound hopefulness in people, a hopefulness which against all odds so often paid off. We, by contrast, tend to be highly cynical of people because we fail to see what they might turn into in spiritual terms.</p><p><em>"</em>I send unto you" is a reference to the sending of the great commission. The Lord’s desire was that the worldwide witness began at Jerusalem (<em><a href='B:490 24:47'>Luk 24:47</a></em>), and Paul’s interpretation of the commission was clearly that it involved being sent&nbsp;<em>firstly</em>&nbsp;to the Jews, and then to the Gentiles. The secular disciples were the equivalent of the prophets in the old Israel. There may be particular reference to the New Testament prophets, those who had the Spirit gift of prophecy. <em><a href='B:490 11:49'>Luk 11:49</a></em> adds: “Prophets and apostles”. Clearly the witness of the early Christians is in view.</p><p>The Lord was talking to the scribes (:29), telling them that He was sending “scribes” to them. And those scribes were men amongst whom were the illiterate and who therefore didn’t know the text of Scripture that well. Their qualification was that they had known God’s Son. The Lord is here comparing and contrasting the old and new in the starkest possible terms.</p><p><em>You shall kill</em>-</p><p> As Stephen and James (<em><a href='B:510 7:59'>Act 7:59</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 12:1-2'>Act 12:1-2</a></em>).</p><p><em>And crucify</em>-</p><p> The Lord implied this would be Peter’s fate.</p><p><em>Scourge</em>-</p><p> Fulfilled <em><a href='B:510 22:19-24'>Act 22:19-24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 11:24-25'>2Co 11:24-25</a></em>:&nbsp;</p><p><em>In your synagogues</em>-</p><p> The punishment of synagogue scourging could only be applied by the Jews to official synagogue members. The fact Paul experienced synagogue discipline by beating with rods shows that he too chose to be a member (<em><a href='B:540 11:24'>2Co 11:24</a></em>). The Lord spoke as if His followers would remain within the synagogue system until they were forcibly expelled (<em><a href='B:500 16:2'>Joh 16:2</a></em>). In all this we see a distinct lack of any ‘guilt by association’ mentality with the Lord. He did not ask His followers to break religious association with those who were both morally and doctrinally astray, but rather to remain in those associations until they were cast out. Notice again how the Lord refers to&nbsp;<em>your</em>&nbsp;synagogues, just as&nbsp;<em>God’s</em>&nbsp;house became “<em>your</em>&nbsp;house”.</p><p><em>Persecute them-&nbsp;</em>By Paul, who was himself later “persecuted” by the Jews (s:w. <em><a href='B:540 4:9'>2Co 4:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:11'>Gal 5:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 6:12'>Gal 6:12</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p><em>From city to city</em>-</p><p> Fulfilled in <em><a href='B:510 14:19'>Act 14:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 17:13'>Act 17:13</a></em>:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:35'>Mat 23:35</a></em>&nbsp;<em>That upon you</em>-</p><p> One would’ve expected God to be so hurt by the death of His Son that judgment came immediately upon those responsible. But instead, the Lord predicted that the judgment would come only after the Jews had further persecuted the apostles as they went out to fulfil the great preaching commission to the Jews. This apparent delay was not because God was not hurt or not angry. He was. But His patient love and desire for human repentance, to give them yet more chances, was simply greater. The delay was so that the Lord could send out the apostles of :34 to appeal to Israel for repentance. But they had been given final appeal after final appeal. And still God waited for their repentance. With what eagerness must He have watched for response to the preaching to them, and with what generous provision He would’ve provided for all those who wished to make that appeal to the Jews. And nothing has changed to this day. The idea of blood coming upon,&nbsp;<em>epi</em>, a person clearly meant ‘guilt for their death’. Soon the Jews were to be using this very term in asking for the blood of Jesus to be ‘upon’ them (<em><a href='B:470 27:25'>Mat 27:25</a></em>). Because Jesus was the personification of God’s prophetic word and thereby the summary of all the prophets, their desire for&nbsp;<em>His</em>&nbsp;blood to be upon them was effectively taking upon themselves the blood of the prophets.</p><p><em>May fall the guilt for all the righteous blood shed on the land</em>-</p><p> This stands for ‘<em>judgment for</em>&nbsp;all the righteous blood shed’. Note how language is being used here. The sin is put by metonymy for&nbsp;<em>the judgment for</em>&nbsp;the sin. Sin is its own judgment. To sin is to ask for judgment / condemnation. In this lies the utter lack of logic in any sin. And iniquity was added to their iniquity (<em><a href='B:230 69:27'>Psa 69:27</a></em> - a specific prophecy of the Jews who killed Jesus), just as righteousness can be imputed:&nbsp;</p><p><em>From the blood of Abel the righteous</em>-</p><p> If that generation were guilty of Abel’s murder, this associates them with Cain. The Jewish false teachers are likened to Cain (<em><a href='B:690 3:12'>1Jn 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:720 1:11'>Jud 1:11</a></em>); and the Lord says that the Jews seeking to kill Him are the sons of the one who was a “murderer from the beginning” (<em><a href='B:500 8:44'>Joh 8:44</a></em>). Cain was the first murderer:&nbsp;</p><p><em>To the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah</em>-</p><p> Or, Baruk. The prophet Zechariah would fit this description, but there’s no record of him being murdered. Josephus in&nbsp;<em>The Jewish War</em>&nbsp;4:5:4 speaks of a Zacharias ben Baruch who was assassinated by the Zealots in the Sanhedrin. But he was not a prophet, and this event was still future. And he wasn’t killed in the temple. However, there was a prophet Zechariah who was stoned to death in the temple (<em><a href='B:140 24:19-22'>2Ch 24:19-22</a></em>). He was the son or grandson of Jehoiada, so it’s feasible he was the son of a Baruk. The Hebrew Bible ended with 2 Chronicles, and so the mention of this murder would form an appropriate inclusio with the first murder, of Abel. All the murders of the faithful, from the first to the last as recorded in the Hebrew Bible, were going to have their judgment exacted from the generation who crucified God’s Son:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Whom you slew between the sanctuary and the altar</em>-</p><p> See on :18&nbsp;<em>The altar.</em>&nbsp;The mention of this detail would perhaps be because the Lord has just spoken of their wrong attitude to both temple and altar (:20,21). He is saying that effectively they had desecrated temple and altar- when they claimed such deep reverence for them. Their mercenary focus upon the gold of the temple and the gifts placed upon the altar was to such an extent that they had robbed the actual temple and altar of their holiness. This was no better than killing a righteous prophet in the holy place:&nbsp;</p><p><em>"</em>Whom&nbsp;<em>you</em>&nbsp;slew" shows that the murder was counted to them, in the sense that the blood of those martyrs was “required of this generation” (<em><a href='B:490 11:51'>Luk 11:51</a></em>). Sin, like righteousness, can be imputed as part of the downward spiral which operates as the opposite of the upward spiral in spiritual life.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:36'>Mat 23:36</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Truly I say to you, all these things shall come upon this generation</em>-</p><p> Even in this prediction of terrible judgment there is grace. Because the AD70 judgments didn’t come until nearly 40 years afterwards. Male lifespans in first century Palestine were estimated at an average of 29 years by J:D. Crossan, basing his research on tomb inscriptions and analysis of bones from graves. So the actual ‘elders’ who were responsible for the Lord’s death likely died in their beds rather than in the Jewish-Roman war or the final holocaust in Jerusalem. I can only explain this on the basis of God’s grace prolonging that final coming of judgment, in the earnest hope that Israel would yet repent. In the context of AD70, this would appear to be the teaching of 2 Peter 3. We would expect those men to have fairly soon received their judgment in this life. They will be judged- at the last day. But it would seem that God’s desire to judge them was in tension with His desire to give Israel the maximum opportunity for repentance. We can only draw a sharp breath at God’s grace. Another approach would be to understand that the threatened judgment upon that generation simply didn’t happen- in their lifetimes. The entire Divine program was delayed until the last days, when that generation shall be resurrected and receive their judgment. The events of AD70 were simply a foretaste and prefigurement of the final judgment at the Lord’s second coming.</p><p>"This generation" is a phrase often used by the Lord in Matthew concerning those who heard and dealt with Him. It is surely the same generation in view in <em><a href='B:470 24:34'>Mat 24:34</a></em>: “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled”:&nbsp;<em>This</em>&nbsp;generation is used elsewhere by the Lord concerning those right in front of Him. It is the same “this generation” in <em><a href='B:470 23:36'>Mat 23:36</a></em> as in <em><a href='B:470 24:34'>Mat 24:34</a></em>. The Lord doesn’t, therefore, mean ‘The future generation which shall exist and see these things will not pass until all is fulfilled’. He is saying that the generation,&nbsp;<em>this</em>&nbsp;generation, would not pass until all was fulfilled. The fact all wasn’t fulfilled simply in that generation shows that there was a major delay or change in the Divine program. And the reason for the delay was not simply that Israel hadn’t repented, but because God’s loving patience was still awaiting their repentance- and He so wished them to repent.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:37'>Mat 23:37</a></em>&nbsp;<em>O Jerusalem, Jerusalem</em>-</p><p> It was “this generation” which killed the prophets (:35), so why does the Lord specifically talk here about the children of Jerusalem? “Daughter of Zion” was an Old Testament term used for the faithful remnant in Jerusalem. But the way the Lord talks of gathering Jerusalem’s residents under His wings is surely because He had a clear vision before Him of how the city would be burnt. For a hen typically gathers her brood under her wings to protect them from a barnyard fire; or perhaps with the intention of being burnt first to preserve the life of her brood as long as possible. And these were the Lord’s feelings to the “Jerusalem” which rejected Him and sought His life; He wanted to save them, to buy them some more time at least (as reflected in the parable of the worker who doesn’t want to cut the tree down immediately). But they didn’t want to know. It was and is all so tragic.</p><p><em>Which kills the prophets</em>-</p><p> The allusion is to the parable of the husbandmen, who killed and stoned the servants / prophets sent to them (<em><a href='B:470 21:35'>Mat 21:35</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p><em>And stones those sent to her</em>-</p><p> The punishment for apostasy (<em><a href='B:50 13:10'>Deu 13:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:59'>Act 7:59</a></em>). It was their wilful religious misunderstandings which led them to such violence in practice:&nbsp;</p><p><em>How often would I have&nbsp;gathered</em>&nbsp;<em>your children together</em>&nbsp;- He lamented over a Zion that sought only to hurt and murder Him. Yet not so many verses later in our Bibles we hear the Lord using the same word in saying that at His coming, the elect would be "<em>gathered together</em>" unto Him (<em><a href='B:470 24:31'>Mat 24:31</a></em>). He so often had earnestly desired the coming of His Kingdom there and then; to gather His people unto Him. But they would not. It must have been unbearable to be such a sensitive person in such a hard and insensitive, dehumanizing world. “How often…” suggests that there were specific times in His ministry when it would have been potentially possible to gather together Zion’s children in one and begin the Kingdom. But they refused.</p><p><em>Even as a hen gathers her chickens-&nbsp;</em>We see the Lord’s humility here in comparing Himself to a female, humble, farmyard animal- and not a proud lion. Many of the descriptions of Christ in the parables are taken from Old Testament passages describing the feelings of&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;towards Israel, showing the truth of this in the first century context when Israel were still God's people. Thus the Lord's description of Himself as a hen wishing to gather the chicks of Jerusalem is based on <em><a href='B:290 31:5'>Isa 31:5</a></em>: "As mother-birds flying, so will the Lord defend Jerusalem" (Heb:):&nbsp; <em><a href='B:490 13:8'>Luk 13:8</a></em> could suggest that Christ's attitude to Israel was even more patient than that of God Himself; yet because their feelings to Israel are identical, the implication is perhaps that the Son enables and thereby persuades the Father to be even more patient with us than He would naturally be See on <em><a href='B:470 15:13'>Mat 15:13</a></em>.</p><p><em>Under her wings- but you were not willing</em>-</p><p> This is a classic Old Testament figure, of the faithful taking refuge under the wings of God’s cherubic care. The gracious desire of the Lord to save even those who crucified Him is the essence of God’s saving care in the Old Testament.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:38'>Mat 23:38</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Behold, your house</em>-</p><p> The temple had always been called "The house of Yahweh". But now it is was theirs, as the "feasts of the Lord" become the "feast of the Jews". The Lord's table became&nbsp;<em>their</em>&nbsp;table (<em><a href='B:230 69:25'>Psa 69:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 69:22'>Psa 69:22</a></em>). They had hijacked God's institutions, just as men today have hijacked the Lord's table and imposed their own guest list and rejection policy upon it. Likewise the Lord called the law of God through Moses as now being “<em>their</em>&nbsp;law" (<em><a href='B:500 15:25'>Joh 15:25</a></em>). The breaking of bread ritual practiced by the Corinthians was eating their&nbsp;<em>own&nbsp;</em>supper and therefore their gatherings were “<em>not</em>&nbsp;to eat the&nbsp;<em>Lord's</em>&nbsp;supper" (<em><a href='B:530 11:20'>1Co 11:20</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p><em>Is left unto you desolate</em>-</p><p> The Greek word is used many times and always in the sense of a wilderness. This is the fulfilment of <em><a href='B:350 2:3'>Hos 2:3</a></em>, where God through Hosea had threatened to make His beloved "a wilderness". This is the link with the Olivet Prophecy in chapter 24, which develops this theme of the desolation of the temple and a desolating abomination which was to be placed there. Clearly, therefore, the primary intention of the Olivet prophecy was to the Jewish generation and temple in which immediate context the Lord was speaking. The fact the prophecy clearly has latter day applications and did not completely fulfil in AD70 shows that there was a change of plan, as has often happened in the Divine program, with prophecies being delayed and reapplied in their fulfilment.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 23:39'>Mat 23:39</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For I say to you, you shall not see me from this time forward, until</em>-</p><p> The same words are used in <em><a href='B:470 13:14'>Mat 13:14</a></em>, "You shall not perceive / see" Christ. Previously, they had 'seen' Christ as Messiah, realizing that this was the heir, and desiring therefore to kill Him. But now the Lord was giving them over to the blindness of their hatred. They would not knowingly crucify God's Son. But He was saying that He now was going to stop them 'seeing' / perceiving Him for who He was, so that they would crucify Him. And they would only again perceive Him as God's Son all too late, when at the day of judgment they uttered the words of Messianic welcome "Blessed is He that comes...". And yet even in this terrible judgment there was interwoven a possibility of hope. They would only perceive Him again as God's Son&nbsp;<em>when</em>, or,&nbsp;<em>until the time that</em>, they recognized Him as Messiah in the Messianic words "Blessed is He that comes...". Once they made that repentance, they would again perceive / see Him. However, it could be argued that that is axiomatic. The thrust of the Lord's words is surely that in the day of judgment, all too late, they would perceive Him again as He is in truth. But all too late.</p><p><em>You shall say-&nbsp;</em>When they are appointed their portion with the hypocrites and there is wailing and gnashing of teeth,&nbsp;<em>then&nbsp;</em>shall the Kingdom be likened unto the five wise and five foolish virgins:&nbsp;<em>Then</em>&nbsp;the rejected will understand the principles of that parable, crystal clearly. Members of the ecclesia of Israel will say "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord"- but be rejected. Likewise the Egyptians, fleeing in the mud from Yahweh as they vainly hoped against hope that the returning waters wouldn't somehow reach them... they came to know Yahweh (<em><a href='B:20 14:18'>Exo 14:18</a></em>). It could well be that this knowing of Yahweh involves a desperate recounting of their sins, seeing that one of the purposes of condemnation is to make men aware of their sinfulness and the depth of God's grace.</p><p><em>Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord-&nbsp;</em>When Jerusalem sees Jesus again, they will be saying: “Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord”. This would suggest they are waiting for Him. And these words being taken from the Passover hallel, it could be that the Lord returns to them at Passover time, when they traditionally expect Him. Indeed, Jerusalem will not see the Lord&nbsp;<em>until</em>&nbsp;they say “Blessed is he…”- as if the time of His return depends upon their ‘seeing’ / perceiving Him beforehand.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:1'>Mat 24:1</a></em></p><p>Matthew 24 : Introduction</p><p>Old Testament prophecy was conditional. There can be no doubt about that. Take these words: "Thus saith the Lord God unto the land of Israel: an end, the end is come upon the four corners of the land. Now the end is come upon thee, and I will send mine anger upon thee" (<em><a href='B:330 7:2-3'>Eze 7:2-3</a></em>). But the ultimate end did not come then in Ezekiel's time and the Babylonian destruction of the temple. God's program delayed that ultimate end. Perhaps because of His mercy, the repentance of a remnant, or for other reasons as yet unknown to us and unseen from our earthly viewpoint. My approach to the Olivet prophecy is that it was intended to be fulfilled in the first century- because this was the intended time or one of the intended times for the Lord’s second coming and the establishment of the Kingdom. Therefore those aspects of the predictions which depended upon God to fulfil, He did e.g. earthquakes, famines. But the essential preconditions of Israel’s repentance and the spread of the Gospel worldwide were not fulfilled. And so the prophecy has been rescheduled and reapplied to some later time- and it would appear that time is now upon us. This approach may be new to some, for it involves understanding God as ‘open’, and more responsive to human behaviour than we might have thought. If this is something you feel the need to still get your mind around, then the digression about the nature of prophecy may be helpful. If you have no problem with the idea of God’s prophetic word being delayed or rescheduled in its fulfilment, then the digression doesn’t need to be read.</p><p>We need not get overly worried about the supposed discrepancies between prophecy and its historical fulfilment. Such differences don't negate the Divine inspiration of the original prophecy- rather do they show how God's intentions can be worked out in different ways because of the open-ended approach He takes to human response. Thus it's been observed that the siege of Jerusalem in AD66-70 doesn't exactly follow the descriptions in <em><a href='B:490 19:41-44'>Luk 19:41-44</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 21:20-24'>Luk 21:20-24</a></em>. This would be because there were within the Olivet prophecy a number of possible scenarios of what could happen&nbsp;<em>if</em>&nbsp;the believers fled the city as commanded; and of course,&nbsp;<em>if</em>&nbsp;Israel repented and accepted Christ at His AD70 'coming' in judgment. Additionally we must remember that this prophecy was only having its initial fulfilment in AD70- the final fulfilment will be in our last days.</p><p>Martin Hengel concludes that the early Gospel records were so radical that they would’ve been part of an “underground literature”. He suggests that the Roman law forbidding oral or written prophecies about the fall of the Roman empire- on pain of death- was enough to make the Olivet prophecy alone a highly illegal document (Martin Hengel,&nbsp;<em>Studies In The Gospel Of Mark</em>&nbsp;(London: SCM, 1985) p. 28).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:2'>Mat 24:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But he answered and said to them: Do you not see all these things?</em>-</p><p> AV "See ye not all these things?". Read this carefully. He doesn't say 'Do you see all these things?'. He uses the negative- 'Do you&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;see all these things?'. This isn't mere style or literary convention. To not see something means you do not see it. Let's not assume that "all these things" refers to the temple building. The Lord has just used the term in <em><a href='B:470 23:36'>Mat 23:36</a></em>: "All these things shall come upon this generation". And&nbsp;<em>pas tauta</em>, "all things", runs as a triple refrain throughout the Olivet prophecy, concerning the 'all things' of the predicted time of crisis coming upon Israel (<em><a href='B:470 24:8'>Mat 24:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:33-34'>Mat 24:33-34</a></em>). If reading in context means anything, the "all things" must refer not to the temple buildings, but to the "all things" of Jerusalem's coming judgment. The Lord is asking them: 'Do you not see / perceive that all these judgments "all things" must come upon these wonderful buildings you're showing Me? No? Then OK, I will spell out those "all things" in gruesome detail. Don't look at the world as it stands before you at this moment, but remember the "all things" of judgment to come which are spoken about them". The Lord has previously condemned the Jewish world for 'not seeing' and He is warning the disciples that again they may be so influenced by Judaism that they don't 'see' the judgments to come with the eye of faith in His word. See later in this verse on&nbsp;<em>Left here</em>:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Truly I say to you. There shall not be left here</em>-</p><p> This again expands upon His previous use of this word in <em><a href='B:470 23:38'>Mat 23:38</a></em>: "Your house is&nbsp;<em>left</em>&nbsp;unto you desolate". He is asking the disciples to see with the eye of faith- that effectively, the great stones of the temple were already thrown down, the temple was already "desolate" (Gk. 'a deserted place').</p><p><em>One stone upon another</em>-</p><p> The judgment of the leprous house (<em><a href='B:30 14:41'>Lev 14:41</a></em>). At the time of the final assault on Jerusalem in AD69, Titus commanded that the temple was to be spared. But the Lord's words came true, just as all prophetic words will, despite every human effort to deny their power. Josephus claims that the gold of the temple melted and therefore each stone was prized apart to remove the gold.</p><p><em>Which shall not be thrown down</em>-</p><p> There was a strong belief in Judaism that the temple would last eternally. Hence the disciples’ question about “the end of the age” was because for them, any talk about the end of the temple meant the end of the world. They are not therefore asking about different chronological events when they ask when this shall be, and what sign would indicate the end of the age (:3). This prophecy of the destruction of the temple implied an ending of the Mosaic law. Hence the same word translated "thrown down" is ascribed to Stephen when he was accused of preaching that the Lord Jesus would "<em>destroy</em>&nbsp;this place and therefore change the customs which Moses delivered us" (<em><a href='B:510 6:14'>Act 6:14</a></em>). Paul uses the same word about his 'destruction' of the things of legalistic dependence on the law for salvation, by preaching salvation by grace in Jesus (<em><a href='B:550 2:18'>Gal 2:18</a></em>). It is also the word used in <em><a href='B:540 5:1'>2Co 5:1</a></em>, a passage which seems to have some reference to the impending destruction of the temple and its replacement with the spiritual house of God's building: "Our earthly house of this tabernacle be&nbsp;<em>destroyed</em>&nbsp;s:w. "thrown down", we have a building of God, an house not made with hands...". All this would suggest that there was a changeover period envisaged between the Lord's death and the final ending of the jurisdiction of the Mosaic law. Seeing the end Lord ended the Law on the cross, this again is to be seen as a concession to the conservatism of the Jews.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:3'>Mat 24:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And as He sat on the mount of Olives</em>-</p><p> The word picture is painted of the Lord sitting alone, and then the disciples come to Him. Again we sense the separation between the Lord and His followers. Matthew gives much attention to the Lord sitting (<em><a href='B:470 13:1-2'>Mat 13:1-2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 15:29'>Mat 15:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 22:44'>Mat 22:44</a></em>). This is what we would expect of a genuine eyewitness who recalled the Lord's body language and movements.</p><p><em>The disciples</em>-</p><p> <em><a href='B:480 13:3'>Mar 13:3</a></em> defines them as strictly Peter, James, John and Andrew. Hence they came “privately”.</p><p><em>Came to Him privately</em>-</p><p> See on :1&nbsp;<em>Came to Him</em>.</p><p><em>Saying: Tell us, when shall these things be? And what is the sign</em>-</p><p> They clearly expected one particular sign, and&nbsp;<em>semeion</em>&nbsp;is typically used of a miraculous wonder. Instead, the Lord gave them a series of signs which they were to discern. The fulfilment of these signs in our times is no less than a miracle- that such detailed predictions could start to come true before our eyes. Such fulfilment of prophecy is therefore itself a miracle. The disciples repeat the Pharisees' question about when the end will come- in almost the same words. They were clearly influenced by them (<em><a href='B:490 17:20'>Luk 17:20</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:480 13:4'>Mar 13:4</a></em>). &nbsp;</p><p><em>Of your coming</em>-</p><p> Without doubt,&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;is used in the NT and contemporary literature to refer to a literal and not an invisible presence (e.g. <em><a href='B:530 16:17'>1Co 16:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 7:6'>2Co 7:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 10:10'>2Co 10:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 1:26'>Phi 1:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 2:12'>Phi 2:12</a></em>). Any 'coming' of the Lord in Jerusalem's judgment of AD70 was only at best a foretaste of His final coming. It's simply not good enough to claim that He 'came' invisibly or spiritually. The word&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;simply doesn't mean this. And yet the destruction of the temple and His 'coming' are linked together; hence my conclusion that His&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;was delayed and the prophetic program delayed and rescheduled.</p><p><em>And of the end of the age</em>-</p><p> See on :2&nbsp;<em>Thrown down</em>. They saw this as parallel with His 'coming' and the destruction of the temple. There is no suggestion that they saw these as three different chronological events, and the Lord's answers give no hint that He saw them as distinct events. Quite simply, the Lord's second coming and the destruction of the temple were understood by them all, the Lord included, as simultaneous. The fact the Lord's coming didn't occur when the temple was destroyed can only therefore mean that the Divine program was rearranged. For preterism notwithstanding, the Lord has clearly not returned in glory yet, neither did He do so in AD70. "The end of the age" had been use by the Lord to describe the last day of judgment (<em><a href='B:470 13:39-40'>Mat 13:39-40</a></em>, as also <em><a href='B:340 12:4'>Dan 12:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:340 12:7'>Dan 12:7</a></em> LXX). The very same phrase used in <em><a href='B:470 13:39-40'>Mat 13:39-40</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 13:49'>Mat 13:49</a></em> with clear reference to the Lord's second coming. In no way was the separation between true and false believers, and the punishment of all the latter class, achieved in AD70. The phrase is also used in <em><a href='B:470 28:20'>Mat 28:20</a></em>, where the Lord sends out the disciples on their great preaching mission with the assurance that He will be with them "unto the end of the age". The implication could be that the end of the age is dependent upon the fulfilment of the great commission. The disciples failed in this, both in performing it because of their initial hang up about preaching to Gentiles and because of the paucity of response to their work. And so the end of the age, the second coming, is yet to come- when the Gospel really does go into all the world, then the end shall come (:14). <em><a href='B:650 9:26'>Heb 9:26</a></em> uses the phrase with reference to the situation in the first century- "now once in the end of the age has Christ appeared". It could have come then- but it did not. <em><a href='B:520 9:28'>Rom 9:28</a></em> speaks of how God will have to finally intervene in speeding things up- and Paul writes here in the context of Israel's final response to the Gospel: "He will end s:w. the work, and cut it short". And the word for "end" is also used to describe how God will end or finally execute the new covenant with Israel (<em><a href='B:650 8:8'>Heb 8:8</a></em>)- when they accept that new covenant in responding to the Gospel. Clearly the global preaching of the Gospel and Israel's response to it are crucial requirements for the "end of the age" to come. And there is no lack of evidence that these signs are on the cusp of fulfilment.</p><p>Usually, the Lord didn't reply directly to questions (in this case, “When…?”); He gave answers which branched out into something altogether more comprehensive than the original question (Consider <em><a href='B:470 13:10-11'>Mat 13:10-11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 15:2-3'>Mat 15:2-3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 10:4-5'>Mar 10:4-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 17:20'>Luk 17:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 3:4-5'>Joh 3:4-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 4:9-10'>Joh 4:9-10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 6:28-29'>Joh 6:28-29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 8:53-54'>Joh 8:53-54</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 11:8-9'>Joh 11:8-9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 14:22-23'>Joh 14:22-23</a></em>):&nbsp;<em>Nearly every example of the Lord Jesus answering a question includes this feature.</em>&nbsp;To the disciples, the destruction of the temple meant the end of the age- it was a calamity. They assumed that if the temple was destroyed, it must be replaced immediately by their Jesus coming again with his Messianic Kingdom. Their minds were still not suitably distanced from their Judaist background. They asked&nbsp;<em>one</em>&nbsp;question: "When shall these things (the destruction of the temple) be? And what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?" (<em><a href='B:480 13:4'>Mar 13:4</a></em>). <em><a href='B:470 24:4'>Mat 24:4</a></em> can make it seem that they asked two questions: "When shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the world?". But the parallel record in <em><a href='B:480 13:4'>Mar 13:4</a></em> makes it clear that actually these were parts of the same question concerning the temple's destruction. To the disciples, the coming of Christ, the end of the world and the temple's destruction were all the same event. It could be that the Lord answered their question by speaking of how there would be the destruction of the temple, but His real coming and the final ending of this world would be at a future date. His answer was therefore fundamentally relevant to his second coming, although built into it was some reference to the destruction of the temple in AD70. As He so often does, the Lord turned round the terms of the question. They thought his "coming" would be at the temple's destruction, and so they asked for signs of His "coming". But Christ shows that this wasn't a correct view: His real "coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" (<em><a href='B:470 24:30'>Mat 24:30</a></em>) would not be then, but after all the various signs he described were fulfilled. He was surely saying: 'OK the temple will be destroyed, and many of the signs I'm giving will have some application to that period; but the destruction of the temple isn't the sign of my coming. Note the signs I give you, and watch for their fulfilment: and&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;you'll know when to expect my coming':&nbsp;</p><p>When the disciples asked "When shall these things be, and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?" (<em><a href='B:490 21:7'>Luk 21:7</a></em>), the Lord didn't cut short the conversation by saying 'Well actually you can't know, so your question isn't appropriate'. He gave them just what they asked for: signs whereby the faithful would know "when these things shall come to pass". The primary application of all this was that the faithful knew exactly the approaching end of the Jewish age in AD70- everything went according to plan, for those who correctly understood the prophecies. Therefore James, Peter and Paul could assuredly teach that "the judge standeth before the door" (<em><a href='B:660 5:9'>Jas 5:9</a></em>) etc. And it is apparent that the situation in the run up to AD70 was typical of that in our last days. Likewise, the position of the faithful remnant in Babylon at the time of the restoration is another type of latter day events. And they too had an opening of their eyes to the prophetic word, resulting in an ability to clearly see where they were, and that the time of restoration of Israel's Kingdom was imminent. 'What will be the signs of the last days?' was indeed answered quite directly, but building up to a personal, incisive appeal to pray constantly that we will be preserved from those horrors and be accepted before the final judgment seat of God's Son (<em><a href='B:490 21:7'>Luk 21:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 21:36'>Luk 21:36</a></em>). It was as if the Lord was adding a powerful caveat- as if to say 'Now don't go and get obsessed and distracted trying to match these signs to current events- worry about how&nbsp;<em>you</em>&nbsp;will survive the last days, and whether, when you stand before Me in the very end, you will stand or fall before Me'. And 'Are you really the Messiah? Do you really fulfil all the Old Testament prophecies?' was met by an appeal to not stumble in faith (<em><a href='B:490 7:21-23'>Luk 7:21-23</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:4'>Mat 24:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And Jesus answered and said to them: Take heed that no one lead you astray</em>-</p><p> Warnings against being deceived are a major theme in the Lord's message here (:5,11,24). Paul read the prophecy of deceivers arising in the last days as referring to deceivers arising within the ecclesia, i:e. people who were already baptized, consciously deceiving the majority of the ecclesia. He repeats this conviction at least three times (<em><a href='B:470 24:4'>Mat 24:4</a></em> = <em><a href='B:560 5:6'>Eph 5:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 2:8'>Col 2:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 2:3'>2Th 2:3</a></em>). The later NT writers make the same appeal using the same Greek words, with reference to not being deceived by the allurements of the fleshly life (<em><a href='B:530 6:9'>1Co 6:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:33'>1Co 15:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 6:7'>Gal 6:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 1:16'>Jas 1:16</a></em>). And warnings against "them that deceive you" are common, along with lament that many believers in the first century had indeed been deceived (s:w. <em><a href='B:620 3:13'>2Ti 3:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 5:19'>Jas 5:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 2:15'>2Pe 2:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 2:26'>1Jn 2:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 3:7'>1Jn 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 2:20'>Rev 2:20</a></em>). Indeed, Revelation is full of warnings and judgment against "the devil" who deceives God's people (s:w. <em><a href='B:730 12:9'>Rev 12:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 13:14'>Rev 13:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 18:23'>Rev 18:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 19:20'>Rev 19:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 20:3'>Rev 20:3</a></em>). Perhaps this is one reason why the Olivet prophecy was not fulfilled in AD70- the warning with which the Lord opened the prophecy was not heeded by the majority. “Be not deceived" (<em><a href='B:490 21:8'>Luk 21:8</a></em>) is extensively quoted later in the NT concerning the need not be deceived by false teachers&nbsp;<em>within the ecclesia</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:530 6:9'>1Co 6:9</a></em>, <em><a href='B:530 15:33'>1Co 15:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 6:17'>Gal 6:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 3:13'>2Ti 3:13</a></em>, as <em><a href='B:470 24:4'>Mat 24:4</a></em> = <em><a href='B:690 3:7'>1Jn 3:7</a></em>). The deceivers Christ spoke of were not just bogus Messiahs out in the world, but apparently Spirit-gifted brethren who will arise within the ecclesia.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:5'>Mat 24:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For many shall come in my name</em>-</p><p> Coming in the name of the Lord was the formula used in Judaism to describe Messiah (<em><a href='B:470 21:9'>Mat 21:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 23:39'>Mat 23:39</a></em>). The false claims to be Jesus the Christ are hardly persuasive nor vaguely credible. That they should be a source of mass falling away amongst the Lord's people seems hardly likely. We must assume, therefore, that such persons will have a credibility or a surrounding context which makes them far more attractive than they currently are. Revelation speaks of false miracles being done in the last days. Perhaps views of prophetic fulfilment will become so dogmatically held, suggesting that Christ&nbsp;<em>must</em>&nbsp;come once certain things happen in the world, that the believers will be open to easy deception. This scenario would be the more likely if a doctrine of&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>, the "coming" of Christ", is adopted which postulates that His coming will be somehow secret, invisible to the world and perceived only by the faithful.</p><p><em>Saying: I am the Christ, and shall lead many astray-&nbsp;</em>The reader who pays attention to detail will note a significant use of pronouns in the Olivet prophecy: “ye" seems to refer to the faithful minority, who would (e.g.) understand, be persecuted, perish, lift up their heads, and finally endure to the end. "The many" (Gk. the majority) in the ecclesia would fall away. No fewer than four times does the Lord stress that "the majority" would be deceived by false prophets, be offended, and have their love wax cold (<em><a href='B:470 24:5'>Mat 24:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:10-12'>Mat 24:10-12</a></em>). Probably he connected this, at least in his own mind, with his earlier statement that "the many" &nbsp; would be called to his truth, but not chosen (<em><a href='B:470 22:14'>Mat 22:14</a></em>). This difference between " the many / majority" in the ecclesia and the minority of suffering faithful is a theme in the parables which are an appendix to the Olivet prophecy.</p><p>The persecution of God's people was spoken of by the Lord as being one of the clearest signs. And he also emphasized that apostasy within the ecclesia would be the other major sign. When they asked him for the signs, <em><a href='B:480 13:5'>Mar 13:5</a></em> says that Jesus&nbsp;<em>began</em>&nbsp;by warning them of deception from false teachers. The way the NT writers allude to this passage indicates that they saw this deception as not coming from the crazy bogus-Messiahs of the world, but from false teachers&nbsp;<em>within the ecclesia</em>, sometimes supported by apparent possession of the Holy Spirit (<em><a href='B:560 5:6'>Eph 5:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 2:3'>2Th 2:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 1:10'>Tit 1:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:700 1:7'>2Jn 1:7</a></em>). A state of total ecclesial apostasy was the sign which Jesus&nbsp;<em>began</em>&nbsp;with, according to <em><a href='B:480 13:5'>Mar 13:5</a></em>.</p><p>Josephus describes the period before AD70 as being when “The country was full of robbers, magicians, false prophets, false Messiahs and impostors, who deluded the people with promises of great events”&nbsp;<em>Antiquities</em>&nbsp;20:10:13 5,6.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:6'>Mat 24:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And you shall hear of wars and rumours of wars</em>-</p><p> Gk. 'to come to the ears'. The dramatic growth of the media and communication will mean that everyone 'hears' of such things. And our generation as none before is in this situation. We can likewise understand the related word (in the Greek): "<em>rumours</em>&nbsp;of wars". <em><a href='B:490 21:9'>Luk 21:9</a></em> adds "and commotions", disquiet, mental upset and confusion. Hence the appeal not to be "troubled" within our hearts. <em><a href='B:490 21:26'>Luk 21:26</a></em> speaks of human hearts failing them for fear in worry and expectation (AV "looking after") about the world's future. This sign, therefore, is not so much concerning the proliferation of war, but of human worry about the geopolitical situation. And our generation has been the only one capable of fulfilling this situation. Note, however, that&nbsp;<em>you</em>&nbsp;shall hear these things- and the "you" was initially the listening disciples. Clearly the prophecy was intended to have fulfilment in the lifetime of the disciples, but this didn't happen. Because the Divine program was rescheduled.</p><p><em>Ensure you are not alarmed</em>-</p><p> The word is only used outside the Olivet prophecy in <em><a href='B:600 2:2'>2Th 2:2</a></em>, where Paul warns that believers should not be "troubled" by any idea that "the day of Christ is at hand", because the prophecy concerning the great falling away and the man of sin sitting in the temple of God must be fulfilled first. This connection shows that the prophecy of 2 Thessalonians 2 must have a specific latter day fulfilment on the very eve of the Lord's visible return in glory when "the Lord Jesus shall slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to nothing by the powerful glory of His coming" (<em><a href='B:600 2:8'>2Th 2:8</a></em>). The "day of Christ" is therefore the visible return of the Lord, and this, therefore, is the burden of the Olivet prophecy too. For Paul is taking that language and applying it to the second coming of Christ. And that did not happen in AD70. In <em><a href='B:490 21:11'>Luk 21:11</a></em> the Lord spoke of "fearful sights" being seen in latter-day Israel. During their tribulation, Israel will experience intense "terror" (<em><a href='B:30 26:16'>Lev 26:16</a></em>), which would be enough to kill them (<em><a href='B:50 32:24'>Deu 32:24</a></em>):&nbsp;&nbsp; This extraordinary level of fear will be modelled upon that of Jacob as he faced Esau- representing Israel's confrontation with the Arabs in the last days (<em><a href='B:300 30:5'>Jer 30:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 30:7'>Jer 30:7</a></em>):&nbsp;&nbsp; This state of fear will result in many Jews going to live in Jerusalem, as happened during the Babylonian and Assyrian invasions (<em><a href='B:300 35:11'>Jer 35:11</a></em>):&nbsp;&nbsp; Ezekiel had prophesied of this time:&nbsp;"Terrors (perhaps an intensive plural - i:e. 'the one great terror') by reason of the sword shall be upon My people" (<em><a href='B:330 21:12'>Eze 21:12</a></em>):&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p><em>For this must happen- but the end is not yet</em>-</p><p> Quoting <em><a href='B:340 2:28'>Dan 2:28</a></em> LXX, as if the prophecy of Daniel 2 could have had its fulfilment at the time of the destruction of the temple in AD70. Again we encounter the idea of potential fulfilments of prophecy which in fact didn't happen when they could have done. The AV inserts in italics "all these things", but the Lord has only given the sign of worry about wars at this stage in the discourse. He used the identical phrase in predicting that the "all things" of the Mosaic system were to be fulfilled in His death on the cross (<em><a href='B:470 5:18'>Mat 5:18</a></em>). The same term is used in <em><a href='B:500 1:3'>Joh 1:3</a></em>: "All things were fulfilled AV "made" in Him"- surely a reference to the fulfilment of the Mosaic law in Christ. The "old things" of the Mosaic system passed away, and in Christ "all things are fulfilled AV "made" new" (<em><a href='B:540 5:17'>2Co 5:17</a></em> - same Greek words). There was a changeover period permitted between the Mosaic system and that of Christ, which finished when the temple was destroyed in AD70 and obedience to the Mosaic law thereby became impossible. If this line of interpretation is correct, then we have the Lord hinting that the Mosaic system would be ended, the temple destroyed, but the end was still not to be then. This would again indicate that the events of AD70 were not the "end" which the Lord had in view. "The end" (s:w:) would only come when the Gospel was preached in the entire habitable world (:14) and the believers had been persecuted of all men (<em><a href='B:480 13:13'>Mar 13:13</a></em>). But again, the Lord had in mind the possibility that the disciples themselves would endure "unto the end" (<em><a href='B:470 10:22'>Mat 10:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:13'>Mat 24:13</a></em>). It could have come in their lifetime; but it didn't. John's Gospel replaces the Olivet prophecy with the upper room discourse, in which the Lord spoke of His spiritual presence in the hearts of believers through the Comforter. And John's equivalent of "the end" in that discourse is the comment that the Lord Jesus loved His people "unto the end" through dying on the cross (<em><a href='B:500 13:1'>Joh 13:1</a></em> s:w:). This is not to downplay the reality of the second coming, but it is a foil against a mindset that thinks solely in terms of fulfilling prophecy and the literal coming of the Lord. True and wonderful as that is, the essence of the Lord's presence is in His abiding presence in the hearts of spiritually minded believers in Him, and the "end" is His death for us, which in one sense is enough for us all regardless of when He will literally return. But again, Paul, like his Lord, felt that "the end" could have come in the first century; for he writes of how the believers then were living at "the end s:w. of the age" (<em><a href='B:530 10:11'>1Co 10:11</a></em>), when God's wrath against Israel was about to burst "unto the end (AV "to the uttermost"; <em><a href='B:590 2:16'>1Th 2:16</a></em>):&nbsp; Likewise Peter: "The end s:w. of all things is at hand" (<em><a href='B:670 4:7'>1Pe 4:7</a></em>). Likewise <em><a href='B:340 9:26'>Dan 9:26</a></em> could then have had its fulfilment:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:7'>Mat 24:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For nation shall rise against nation</em>-</p><p> Any first century fulfilment is unlikely because the&nbsp;<em>Pax Romana</em>&nbsp;meant that the Roman empire was firmly in power and such a situation did not therefore occur.<em>&nbsp;Ethnos</em>&nbsp;is the word commonly translated "Gentiles". The picture of nations and kingdoms rising up against each other was simply not fulfilled in the run up to AD70- the Roman empire with their&nbsp;<em>Pax Romana</em>&nbsp;did not permit such a situation. And the system of world empires which disintegrated in the 20th Century likewise didn't permit much of this in recent times, especially in the area around Israel, or in the land promised to Abraham, which is the focus of all Bible prophecy. Only in our times has this become a reality, especially in the Arab world and amongst the nations located in the territory promised to Abraham. The language of 'rising up' in revolt is now common amongst them. The picture, however, is of the Gospel going into all those "nations" at this time (:14), all those nations persecuting the believers (:9), and the nations AV "Gentiles" taking Jerusalem and treading it down (<em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em>); despite their internal struggles, these same "all nations" will be confederated under a latter Babylon (<em><a href='B:730 17:15'>Rev 17:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 18:3'>Rev 18:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 18:23'>Rev 18:23</a></em>). The overall picture is of Gospel preaching going on at a time when the nations are rising up against each other, and at the same time persecuting the believers. This scenario is developing- but is as yet unfulfilled on a global scale. But it is daily fulfilling in the nations surrounding Israel, who are persecuting Christians, rising up against each other, and to whom the Gospel is being powerfully preached. Never before has my own mission organization received such major expression of serious interest from the Moslem nations surrounding Israel, thanks largely to the growth of the internet and the growing disillusion with the existing social and religious situation. People from all nations will be gathered before the Lord for judgment (<em><a href='B:470 25:32'>Mat 25:32</a></em>) and people from every nation will be saved (<em><a href='B:730 5:9'>Rev 5:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 7:9'>Rev 7:9</a></em>)- confirming that the Gospel will indeed spread to all nations before the Lord's return; it must at least be "proclaimed" to them all, thereby making people amongst them responsible to judgment (:14); the "fullness of the Gentiles" must "come in" to Christ before the end comes and Israel repent (<em><a href='B:520 11:25'>Rom 11:25</a></em>). The Lord sent the disciples out to "all nations" (<em><a href='B:470 28:19'>Mat 28:19</a></em> s:w:); the implication is that they failed to take the Gospel to them all, and therefore the intended scenario didn't fulfil as initially intended in the first century. <em><a href='B:490 21:25'>Luk 21:25</a></em> speaks of how there will be "upon the earth land- that promised to Abraham distress of nations", suggesting that the situation amongst the Gentile nations living within the land promised to Abraham is the particular focus of the prophecy. The same language is used of how there were devout Jews in "every nation under Heaven" (<em><a href='B:510 2:5'>Act 2:5</a></em>)- and the list of nations in Acts 2 corresponds with the Middle Eastern Moslem world of today. We note that the promise that Abraham should be father of "many nations" was fulfilled in a literal sense in that Abraham is the ancestor of the Arab nations living in the land promised to him (<em><a href='B:520 4:17'>Rom 4:17</a></em>). And it is those nations particularly who have stated their desire to take Jerusalem out of the hands of the Jews, as required in <em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em>.</p><p><em>And kingdom against kingdom</em>-</p><p> It seems likely that ‘Babylon’ of the last days will rise to political and military dominance in the Arab world:&nbsp;The 10 nations / horns / leaders which exist in the land promised to Abraham- the “kings of the earth / land”- will give their power to Babylon, by force and by political manoeuvre, and this system will then invade Israel. The horns hating the whore implies there will be inter-Arab friction apparent in the beast system throughout its existence. "Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom" (<em><a href='B:470 24:7'>Mat 24:7</a></em>) will be a sign of the last days. In the AD70 context, this referred to friction between the Semitic peoples living around Israel; and the Lord's words are clearly an allusion to <em><a href='B:140 15:6'>2Ch 15:6</a></em>, which specifically uses the phrase about inter-Arab friction. The fragile alliance between them will then be broken by the Lord’s return, the horns will hate the whore and destroy her. They give their power to the beast for but “one hour”. Daniel seems to associate a covenant which is then broken with the latter day Antichrist. <em><a href='B:290 30:27-31'>Isa 30:27-31</a></em> speaks of the latter day Assyrian as placing “a bridle in the jaw of the people causing them to err”, referring to some kind of covenant / agreement which forces others to follow their direction. The Lord’s especial fury will be against the individual latter day Nebuchadnezzar who leads the invasion. The future leader of Babylon, after the example of Saddam Hussein, will see themselves as Nebuchadnezzar. Isaiah and Micah describe the latter day invader of the land as “the Assyrian” (<em><a href='B:290 10:5'>Isa 10:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 14:25'>Isa 14:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 30:31'>Isa 30:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:400 5:1-6'>Mic 5:1-6</a></em>). This itself suggests we are to see the individual who heads up the invasion, the rosh / chief prince of <em><a href='B:330 38:2'>Eze 38:2</a></em>, as an ethnic Assyrian / Iraqi. <em><a href='B:340 8:24-25'>Dan 8:24-25</a></em> invites us to see the same- the “king of fierce countenance” stands up out of the area of northern Iraq / northern Iran:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Famines</em>-</p><p> There was an acute famine in Israel during Elijah's ministry of three and a half years, as part of God's appeal for Israel to repent and respond to Elijah's message (<em><a href='B:490 4:25'>Luk 4:25</a></em>). And so it will be in the final three and a half year tribulation. Likewise it was famine which led the prodigal to repent and return to the Father (<em><a href='B:490 15:14'>Luk 15:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 15:17'>Luk 15:17</a></em>), a clear prototype of Israel's repentance. And perhaps the greatest prototype of their repentance is in the coming of Joseph's brothers to bow before Him; and this too was provoked by famine throughout the region around Israel (<em><a href='B:510 7:11'>Act 7:11</a></em>). There will be a purpose in all the sufferings which precede the Lord's return- and that purpose is to bring about Israel's repentance, which is the key condition required for His second coming. There were indeed major famines in the lead up to AD70 (<em><a href='B:510 11:28'>Act 11:28</a></em> "a great famine throughout all the world"); again, the signs which depended upon Divine intervention were fulfilled in the first century, but those which depended upon Israel and the believers did not, because they chose not to. And thus the second coming was delayed. “In the reign of the Emperor Claudius (AD41-54) there were four seasons of great scarcity. In the fourth year of his reign, the famine in Judea was so severe that the price of food became enormous and great numbers perished. Earthquakes occurred in each of the reigns of Caligula and Claudius” (R. C. Sproul,&nbsp;<em>The Last Days According to Jesus</em>&nbsp;(Grand Rapids, MI, 2000: Baker Books), p. 36). Paul encourages his first century readers that famine and other elements of the Olivet predictions would not separate believers from the love of God- as if he expected those signs to be fulfilled in their lifetimes (<em><a href='B:520 8:35'>Rom 8:35</a></em>). The seals of Revelation 6 are full of reference to the Olivet predictions, as if they could all have been fulfilled in the first century (<em><a href='B:730 6:8'>Rev 6:8</a></em> speaks specifically of "famine"). Famine can come quicker than ever in our modern world, where most countries depend upon imported food; and this is especially the case in the area around Israel, where the climate doesn't enable the support of the relatively large population living in the area without food being imported. This explains how Babylon's famine comes in one day (<em><a href='B:730 18:8'>Rev 18:8</a></em>). This could never have been possible in the ancient world, where famine required a period of time to develop. Just as Israel initially experienced the early plagues upon Egypt, so it may be that the judgments poured out upon the Arab? world at the very end do initially affect Israel too, and lead them to repentance:&nbsp;</p><p><em>And there shall be famines and earthquakes</em>-</p><p> Just as there was at the crucifixion (<em><a href='B:470 27:54'>Mat 27:54</a></em>), yet another reason for thinking that the tribulation of the last days will enable Israel to identify with the sufferings of their crucified Messiah. Again, earthquakes feature in the seals of <em><a href='B:730 6:12'>Rev 6:12</a></em>; and in the judgments upon Israel's enemies in <em><a href='B:730 11:13'>Rev 11:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 11:19'>Rev 11:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 16:18'>Rev 16:18</a></em>. Again, it seems that Israel will initially experience the judgments upon their enemies, just as they did in the lead up to their Passover deliverance in Egypt which also prefigures their final salvation. The fig tree nation- Israel- is to be shaken of a mighty wind (<em><a href='B:730 6:13'>Rev 6:13</a></em>), and the word "shaken" is a form of that translated "earthquake". The forcing of fruit from the fig tree will be brought about by the experience of the earthquake:&nbsp;</p><p><em>In various places</em>-</p><p> The word "various" (AV "divers") is added by the translators to try to make sense of the otherwise obvious statement that earthquakes will occur in "places". There is no suggestion in the Greek text that earthquakes will occur in various places worldwide where they have not been known to occur. But maybe we have here an intensive plural- the one great place. The same word is used in :15 about "the holy<em>&nbsp;place</em>". There are rumours that an earthquake hit the temple area around AD70. But seeing that the temple mount is the bone of contention between Israel and her Arab neighbours, an earthquake splitting the mount would be appropriate. And of course this would link directly with the prediction of Zechariah 14, that when Christ returns there will be an earthquake which splits it. And yet this is used by the Lord as a sign of His coming, rather than a statement about what will happen at His return. It could be that this is an example of how the meaning of time will be somehow collapsed around the second coming; a sign of His return is in effect His return. Or it could be that the events described in the Olivet prophecy will all happen in a very short period of time, a matter of days rather than years or decades as is assumed by those who seek to connect the predictions with current world events. <em><a href='B:480 13:8'>Mar 13:8</a></em> and <em><a href='B:490 21:11'>Luk 21:11</a></em> speak of the earthquakes in&nbsp;<em>kata</em>&nbsp;places, but this doesn't necessarily mean 'various' places, but could equally mean 'around'- earthquakes around the holy place would then be signs and portents of the earthquake under the Holy Place which will happen when Christ returns. In <em><a href='B:510 6:13-14'>Act 6:13-14</a></em> Stephen's enemies appear to have twisted his quotations of the Lord's Olivet prophecy to mean that Christ would destroy the "holy place" s:w. "places" here in Matthew 24.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:8'>Mat 24:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But all these things are the beginning of the birth pains-&nbsp;</em>The term is used of the Lord's suffering, which came to term in His resurrection (<em><a href='B:510 2:24'>Act 2:24</a></em>)- another hint that the tribulation is intended to bring those who endure it to an identity with the Lord's sufferings, and thus to share in His resurrection. There is therefore a positive intention in the sufferings. They are not merely an angry Deity releasing pent up anger upon the world. The term is also used in <em><a href='B:590 5:3'>1Th 5:3</a></em>, in a section full of allusion to the Olivet prophecy: "When they shall say peace and safety, then sudden destruction comes upon them, as&nbsp;<em>travail</em>&nbsp;s:w. "sorrows" upon a woman with child, and they shall not escape". This suggests that the various trials and tribulations just listed by the Lord are going to come suddenly- they don't describe decades of such things leading up to His return. Rather do they therefore describe a sudden situation which comes at a time of "peace and safety". They may therefore describe the events of days rather than years. The Lord within the Olivet prophecy had spoken of the possibility of "escape" by fleeing, but "they shall&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;escape"- because they will be disobedient to His teaching. The intention of the birth pangs is to forge an identity between the sufferers and the crucified Christ, coming to birth in a resurrection like his. But for these people, the birth pangs are tragic, resulting in death rather than resurrection to life. See on :9&nbsp;<em>To be afflicted</em>:&nbsp;</p><p>The Lord is surely alluding to the Rabbinic idea of "the birth-pangs of the Messiah" which they used in description of the traumatic situation in Israel before Messiah’s appearance. The Jewish public had initially expected Jesus to be Messiah, and felt that their time was indeed the birth-pangs of Messiah. But the Lord is saying that that time is yet to come. Seeing He did not come in AD70, we are again left to understand this as a reference to a situation&nbsp;<em>in Israel</em>&nbsp;which brings about the open manifestation of Messiah.</p><p>We frequently struggle to understand which verses apply to AD70 and which to the last days. I have suggested that forcing such a distinction is unwise because the entire prophecy was a conditional prophecy which began to have fulfilment in AD70 but was rescheduled in its final fulfilment. However it could be argued that <em><a href='B:470 24:8-22'>Mat 24:8-22</a></em> can be read as a parenthesis specifically concerning the events of AD70: the first seven verses and <em><a href='B:470 24:23'>Mat 24:23</a></em> ff. refer to events of both the last days and AD70:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:9'>Mat 24:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Then shall they deliver you up</em>-</p><p> Just as the Lord was 'betrayed' s:w. <em><a href='B:470 10:4'>Mat 10:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 20:18-19'>Mat 20:18-19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 26:2'>Mat 26:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 26:15-16'>Mat 26:15-16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 26:21'>Mat 26:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 26:23-25'>Mat 26:23-25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 26:45-46'>Mat 26:45-46</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 26:48'>Mat 26:48</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 27:3-4'>Mat 27:3-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 17:22'>Mat 17:22</a></em> "the Son of Man shall be betrayed" to the Jews and 'delivered up' to the Gentiles s:w. 27:18,26,2 "delivered Him to Pontius Pilate" for suffering, death- and thereby to resurrection. Again, there is an attempt to make those enduring these things identify with Him in His time of suffering. They too would be delivered up to both Jews and Gentiles- to synagogues Jews; 10:17; <em><a href='B:490 21:12'>Luk 21:12</a></em> and to prisons, rulers and kings Gentiles; <em><a href='B:490 21:12'>Luk 21:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 13:9'>Mar 13:9</a></em>. Mark adds "They shall deliver you up to councils and in the synagogues you shall be beaten". Clearly the Lord had in mind a first century fulfilment of His words, but as we have seen, not all the signs fulfilled in the first century and the Lord's&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;did not literally happen when the temple was destroyed. We therefore have to look to a re-scheduled fulfilment of these words in the persecution of the disciples in the last days.</p><p><em>To tribulation</em>-</p><p> S:w. "great&nbsp;<em>tribulation</em>" (:21,29). The Lord was addressing the disciples, and yet their sufferings were not completely in line with the picture presented here, whereby their suffering was at the same time as Jerusalem was surrounded by armies. Clearly the intended program was delayed. John's equivalent of the Olivet prophecy is the upper room discourse, and the same idea as in :8 of a woman in the sorrows of labour is to be found there, and also this same word for 'afflicted' is found, translated "anguish" and "tribulation": "A woman when she is in labour has…&nbsp;<em>anguish</em>... in the world you shall have&nbsp;<em>tribulation</em>" (<em><a href='B:500 16:21'>Joh 16:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 16:33'>Joh 16:33</a></em>). The Lord seems to speak as if these experiences will be those of all His true followers, but just as His anguish and sorrow came to term in His triumphant resurrection, so for all who are in Him. John uses the language of the Olivet prophecy but seems to apply it in more general terms to the suffering of the believer in all ages. Surely this was consciously done as a response to the fact that the Olivet prophecy had been rescheduled in fulfilment. Again we find the idea of 'affliction' associated with the Lord's sufferings. Joseph, His clearest prototype, was 'afflicted' (<em><a href='B:510 7:10'>Act 7:10</a></em> s:w:), just as his brothers were 'afflicted' to lead them to repentance and acceptance of how badly they had treated Joseph / Jesus (<em><a href='B:510 7:11'>Act 7:11</a></em> s:w:). Stephen's use of the same word for the sufferings of both Joseph and his brothers was surely to teach that Israel's affliction was in order to teach them what they had done to Joseph, and to thereby identify with Him and repent. And this is exactly the purpose of Israel's latter day afflictions as outlined in the Olivet prophecy, and likewise the reason for the new Israel experiencing them- to help us identify with our crucified Lord. The same word is used in <em><a href='B:520 8:35'>Rom 8:35</a></em>: "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or anguish, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?". Here Paul lists the kinds of tribulation outlined in the Olivet prophecy and assures his first century readers that these will never separate them from God's love- he clearly expected the prophecy to have a first century fulfilment. Likewise the Lord foresaw the possibility of the "great tribulation" coming upon the first century church (<em><a href='B:730 2:22'>Rev 2:22</a></em>), and uses the same term "great tribulation" to describe the experiences of those Jewish Christians who would finally be saved (<em><a href='B:730 7:14'>Rev 7:14</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p><em>And shall kill you</em>-</p><p> "Some of you shall they cause to be put to death... but there shall not an hair of your head perish" (<em><a href='B:490 21:16'>Luk 21:16</a></em>) can only be reconciled by appreciating how miraculously the first century disciples were preserved in order to inspire and co-ordinate the rest of the body. Perhaps a similar group of elders ("the two witnesses"?) will be preserved in the last days too:&nbsp;<em>Apokteino</em>, ‘to kill’, is used many times in the Gospels, nearly always with reference to the killing of the Lord Jesus. Again there is the hint that the sufferings of the tribulation period are intended to create identity with the sufferings of the Lord Jesus. In John, the upper room discourse replaces the Olivet prophecy. The word is used there for how the believers would be put out of the synagogues opposition from synagogues is specifically mentioned in the Olivet prophecy and then “whoever kills you will think that he does God service” (<em><a href='B:500 16:2'>Joh 16:2</a></em>). Only religious hatred could explain the mad hatred unto death of which we are reading here- persecution on the basis of thinking that they are doing God service. We can expect, therefore, religiously motivated persecution in the last days. With the collapse of secular Christianity and strong religious commitment in much of the modern world, the only religion likely to fulfil this picture is Islam- and there is no lack of evidence that a worldwide persecution of Jews and those who hold a Jewish rooted faith is absolutely on their agenda, and is already bursting upon us.</p><p><em>And you shall be hated by all nations</em>-</p><p> But the Gospel will then be preached to “all nations” (<em><a href='B:480 13:10'>Mar 13:10</a></em>). It seems that the persecution will result in preaching, perhaps through highly publicized legal cases. If the Gospel is taken to all nations, then this will not need to happen.</p><p><em>For my Name’s sake</em>-</p><p> The phrase rarely occurs outside of the Olivet prophecy; one other time is in the upper room discourse, which is John’s parallel with the Olivet prophecy as recorded in the synoptic Gospels. Here we read again that the believers will be “hated… for My Name’s sake” (<em><a href='B:500 15:18'>Joh 15:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 15:21'>Joh 15:21</a></em>). But in John 15 the Lord seems to be angling His words not just to the twelve, but to all in Him; for His reasoning is that the world’s attitude to Him will be their attitude to us, and all in Him will suffer as He did. Again we can conclude that John, the latest of the Gospels, was re-adjusting the emphasis of the Olivet prophecy, knowing that it had been rescheduled and would not fully come true in an early coming of Christ in the first century.</p><p><em>You shall be beaten in the synagogues&nbsp;</em>(<em><a href='B:480 13:9'>Mar 13:9</a></em>). The Lord predicted that His people would be cast out of the synagogues (<em><a href='B:500 16:2'>Joh 16:2</a></em>), as if He was happy that Christianity remained a sect of Judaism until such time as Judaism wouldn’t tolerate it. His prediction that His people would be beaten in synagogues (<em><a href='B:480 13:9'>Mar 13:9</a></em>) implies they would still be members, for the synagogues only had power to discipline their own members, not the general public. The Lord had no fear of ‘guilt by association’ with wrong religious views such as there were within Judaism:&nbsp;</p><p>Mark and Luke add "It shall turn to you for a testimony". Maybe the idea is that public trial for our faith will be a good public witness. Or it could be that the testimony in our favour is before the Heavenly throne room, where our human situations are as it were played out before the Lord. When the Lord said that His people would preach before rulers ‘for a witness / testimony against them’ (<em><a href='B:480 13:9'>Mar 13:9</a></em>), we are left wondering when and how exactly this will be. It’s hard to come to any other conclusion than that this refers to how our words of preaching will be quoted back to the hearers at the judgment. It’s an incidental proof that it is hearing the word of the Gospel that makes a person responsible to the last judgment. But in our context, my point is that our words of preaching in this life will be quoted back to those who heard them, at the day of judgment. The simple point is, our words aren’t forgotten. They will be quoted back, in some form, at the day of judgment. And yet it appears we can speak and think how we like in this life. Indeed we can; but all these things will ultimately surface again in the last day.</p><p><em><a href='B:490 21:13'>Luk 21:13</a></em> speaks of how when a believer is persecuted, “it shall turn to you for a testimony”. Perhaps the Angels give a positive testimony of the faithful believer in the court of Heaven. And at the final judgment, these things will be 'gone through' with them at judgment as a testimony to their faithfulness. Or could it mean that the way we respond to our trials during the tribulation will determine our verdict at the judgment? It will be a testimony in our favour at the day of judgment. In view of this, "Settle it&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;in your hearts" to make this witness in God's strength (<em><a href='B:490 21:14'>Luk 21:14</a></em>). "In the endurance of you (in the tribulation), ye will gain the souls of you" (<em><a href='B:490 21:19'>Luk 21:19</a></em> Marshall's Interlinear). The run up to the tribulation will provoke a "praying always, that ye may be accounted worthy... to stand before the Son of man" (<em><a href='B:490 21:36'>Luk 21:36</a></em>). Peter describes the tribulation of the believers in the run up to AD70 (and therefore the last days too) as judgment taking place on the house of God, in which even the righteous are "scarcely saved" (<em><a href='B:670 4:17-18'>1Pe 4:17-18</a></em>). This suggests that the last generation of believers will only be saved due to their response to the tribulation which comes upon them; but even then, only by the skin of their teeth. Lot in Sodom and the parable of the virgins, among others, are hints that the last generation of believers will be in a weak state.</p><p><em><a href='B:490 21:15'>Luk 21:15</a></em> adds at this point: "I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay". This is alluding to <em><a href='B:20 4:12'>Exo 4:12</a></em>, where God tells Moses at the time of the Egyptian persecution of God's people, "I will be with thy mouth and teach thee what thou shalt say". This persecution lead to intensified prayer to God, resulting in&nbsp;the deliverance of the suffering saints at Passover time, after a period of especial distress and 'time of trouble' for the surrounding world due to the plagues. After this deliverance, God's people went into the wilderness and were declared God's Kingdom. We have earlier shown how all these events form a remarkable latter day prophecy. This verse also suggests that the gifts of the Spirit may be given to some in the Elijah ministry in order to enable them to make a more powerful witness (as in <em><a href='B:730 11:6'>Rev 11:6</a></em>). The fact they are given personally by Christ would indicate that in some way, Christ is already back at this stage. Time and again we will see how the prophecies of events in the last days are ambiguous as to whether Christ is already back at the time of their fulfilment, or whether they herald his return. Seeing that we will never know the exact time of Christ's return, this is understandable. Similarly Joel 2 prophesies the pouring out of the gifts "before the great and terrible day of the Lord" (<em><a href='B:360 2:31'>Joe 2:31</a></em>). Malachi surely refers to this passage when prophesying the Elijah ministry "before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord" (<em><a href='B:460 4:5'>Mal 4:5</a></em>). This suggests that the 3:5 year Elijah ministry of the last days (<em><a href='B:660 5:17'>Jas 5:17</a></em>) will be accompanied by Spirit gifts, and will coincide with the time of persecution. Note that the gifts were given "before the day of the Lord" in AD70 too. It is possible that because of this possession of the gifts by 'Elijah', false teachers within the ecclesia at the end will also claim to possess them (<em><a href='B:470 24:24'>Mat 24:24</a></em>), so convincingly that all but the elect within the ecclesia will be duped into following them. Yet it must be stressed that it is a feature of the gifts that they are unmistakable and obvious to identify (cp. <em><a href='B:510 4:16'>Act 4:16</a></em>); it will be evident enough if and when they are poured out in the last days.</p>


text:
<p>24:10&nbsp;<em>And then shall many stumble</em>-</p><p> To stumble, in its Biblical sense, implies those in view were once walking in the Faith. This is clearly how the Lord uses it in the parable of the sower (<em><a href='B:470 13:21'>Mat 13:21</a></em> s:w:). The majority Gk. will stumble out of the way in this final tribulation. Such a test of faith is logically required for that generation- because those who are alive at the time of the Lord’s coming will be the only generation who never actually die. They will therefore require this particularly acute test of faith; and the majority will fail it, and stumble from the path. The language of betrayal which is then used would suggest that those who stumble will be like Judas who betrayed the Lord- and he was amongst the believers. It’s a sorry picture, but we must let the Lord’s words have their true weight and fairly obvious meaning. The cosy church environments of today will simply not be that way during the very last days before the Lord’s return:&nbsp; The upper room discourse again has a connection with the Olivet prophecy at this point, because the Lord says that He was warning His followers ahead of time that they would be persecuted and cast out of the synagogues, and He was warning them ahead of time exactly so that they would not be offended (<em><a href='B:500 16:1'>Joh 16:1</a></em>). The Olivet prophecy, if taken seriously, is therefore not mere prediction of future events, but rather specifically intended to stop the faithful stumbling as they behold every detail suddenly coming true in the very last days.</p><p><em>And shall deliver up one another</em>-</p><p> Again, the final sufferings of the Lord Jesus will be experienced within natural and spiritual Israel. <em><a href='B:400 7:2-9'>Mic 7:2-9</a></em> is a clear prophecy of Christ's sufferings. But embedded in it are words which are quoted in <em><a href='B:490 21:16'>Luk 21:16</a></em> and <em><a href='B:470 10:36'>Mat 10:36</a></em> concerning the latter day tribulation of the believers: "The son dishonours the father... a man's enemies are the men of his own house”. In similar manner, some of the prophecies of Israel's latter day sufferings speak in the same context of those of Christ. <em><a href='B:400 5:1'>Mic 5:1</a></em> is an example: "…he hath laid siege against us: they shall smite the judge of Israel (Christ) with a rod upon the cheek". The whole of Amos 5 can be scanned for connections with both the future tribulation of Israel, and also the sufferings of Christ.</p><p><em>And shall hate one another</em>-</p><p> The same word just used for how the believers would be “hated of all nations” (:9). The spirit and religious position of the world will be adopted by some amongst the believers, and they will turn against their brethren as a result of this. This is in line with the language of betrayal just used, replete as it is with allusion to Judas, one of the twelve. Likewise “false prophets” (:11) suggest those located within the community of faith who are pushing a totally different agenda.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:11'>Mat 24:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And many false prophets-&nbsp;</em>A comparison of <em><a href='B:470 24:11'>Mat 24:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:24'>Mat 24:24</a></em> suggests that there will be two particular periods of false prophet activity- at the outbreak of the persecution, and then immediately prior to the Lord's return. This latter group reason that Christ's second coming has already occurred in some non-literal form. Thus :27 speaks as if the clear return of Christ in the clouds will prove them wrong. These men would equate with Peter's description of some within the ecclesia of the last days saying "Where is the promise of His coming?". The language of false prophets suggests they arise from within the community of believers (see on :10). The “many” whom they deceive are presumably the same “many” who shall stumble from their faith (:10). The ‘false prophets’ of our age are hardly very credible. But if these false prophets have apparent access to Holy Spirit gifts and claim to do miracles, as passages in Revelation suggest, then they may well have more credibility. This particular sign was fulfilled in the first century, for “many false prophets s:w. are gone out into the world” (<em><a href='B:690 4:1'>1Jn 4:1</a></em>).</p><p><em>Shall arise</em>-</p><p> The reference is to the LXX of <em><a href='B:300 29:15'>Jer 29:15</a></em>, where we read of false prophets arising amongst Israel whilst they were in Babylon. The message of those false prophets was that Judah would be saved from Babylon without repentance, and that in practice, spiritual separation was not required from Babylon. And this will be the precise context for the false prophets in latter day Israel.</p><p><em>And shall lead many astray</em>-</p><p> False prophets of both Old and New Testaments were associated with immorality or at least, an easy, fleshly ‘spirituality’. With harsh persecution and death sentences for true faith in Christ, the environment will be ripe for such false teachers; and false prophets are believed because people want to believe their message. Four times the Lord repeats this warning against being deceived, using the same word (:4,5,11,24). The words for deception and ‘false prophet’ recur in Revelation, again in a latter day context (<em><a href='B:730 12:9'>Rev 12:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 13:14'>Rev 13:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 18:23'>Rev 18:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 19:20'>Rev 19:20</a></em>). The source of the deceit is ‘Babylon’, the latter day confederacy of anti-Israel and anti-Christian powers around Israel.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:12'>Mat 24:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And because iniquity shall be multiplied</em>-</p><p> The LXX of <em><a href='B:340 12:10'>Dan 12:10</a></em> "The wicked shall do wickedly". This is last days language, describing the situation just before Daniel is resurrected. It cannot therefore have had any major fulfilment in the period before AD70. Thus "Because iniquity shall abound (within the ecclesia?), the love of many ("the many", R:V:- the majority) shall wax cold" (<em><a href='B:470 24:12'>Mat 24:12</a></em>). Bad spiritual standards will spread like cancer in the last days. Thus the ecclesial leaders of the last days must beware of the temptation to be over harsh on the faithful remnant, whilst eating and drinking with "the drunken", i:e. those elements in the ecclesia who will be unprepared for the Lord's coming. <em><a href='B:600 2:7-8'>2Th 2:7-8</a></em> use the same word to describe how the “mystery the Greek is a distinctly religious word of&nbsp;<em>iniquity</em>” was already gathering momentum in the first century, leading to “the wicked one”, the one of iniquity / lawlessness s:w. being revealed; again, we sense the possibility of a first century fulfilment which never came to its ultimate term. “Multiplied” translates&nbsp;<em>plethuno</em>, the noun of which is&nbsp;<em>plethos</em>, frequently translated “multitude”. The idea is that because of the masses being without law, iniquitous, the love of the majority&nbsp;<em>amongst the believers</em>&nbsp;will become cold. They will be influenced by the lawlessness of the majority around them; the church will become as the world. And there is no lack of evidence that this is already happening.</p><p><em>The love-&nbsp;</em>The love-&nbsp;<em>agape</em>&nbsp;– of the majority will be lost in the latter day community of believers, whilst peoples from all nations hear and accept the Gospel. Could this mean that the established groups of believers lose their&nbsp;<em>agape&nbsp;</em>whilst the real fire of the Truth spreads to the new converts made during the great tribulation, as spoken of in Revelation 7? The parables of Matthew 25 seem to refer specifically to the state of the latter day believers, and they speak of a beating of the fellow-servants.</p><p><em>Of the majority</em>-</p><p> The presence of the article, ‘<em>the</em>&nbsp;many’, means that this refers to ‘the majority’.</p><p><em>Shall grow cold</em>-</p><p> A related word is used in <em><a href='B:730 3:15-16'>Rev 3:15-16</a></em> in speaking of how the love of the early believers had decreased from hot to lukewarm, although not completely cold. Again we get the sense that this part of the Olivet prophecy was on its way to fulfilment- but had not come to full term.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:13'>Mat 24:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But he that endures-&nbsp;</em>The idea of enduring to the end and being saved is the spirit of the Lord's struggle on the cross (<em><a href='B:650 12:2-3'>Heb 12:2-3</a></em> s:w:). Again we see that the sufferings of the last days enable the faithful to fellowship the Lord’s crucifixion sufferings:&nbsp;<em>Hupomeno</em>&nbsp;“endure” is a form of&nbsp;<em>meno</em>, the word used so often by the Lord in the upper room discourse for ‘abiding’ or remaining in Him. Again, it seems John has replaced the Olivet prophecy’s call to endure to the end of the tribulation period with an appeal for the believer to abide / endure in Christ to the end of life. The language of the tribulation is applied to the entirety of the Christian’s life. ‘Enduring to the end’ is paralleled with&nbsp;<em>agape</em>&nbsp;love not becoming cold; the real endurance is in continuing in the thankless life of love, in the midst of a majority of believers who have lost their way. This is what is so difficult.</p><p><em>To the end</em>-</p><p> The end of the tribulation period is described with the same term as is used about the Lord’s death on the cross being “the end” (<em><a href='B:470 26:58'>Mat 26:58</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 22:37'>Luk 22:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 13:1'>Joh 13:1</a></em>). Again we see that the experiences of the tribulation are intended to forge identity with the final sufferings of the Lord. <em><a href='B:590 2:16'>1Th 2:16</a></em> speaks of Divine wrath coming upon Israel “to the end” (s:w:; AV “to the uttermost”), as if “the end” could have come in the first century. Peter was very clear: “The end s:w. is at hand” (<em><a href='B:670 4:7'>1Pe 4:7</a></em>). Constantly we see evidence for what could have happened- and yet did not. And yet it shall happen, ultimately. And the only conclusion can really be that the final “end” was deferred, the Divine program rescheduled.</p><p><em>The same shall be saved-&nbsp;</em>In the first instance, “the end” was the end of the tribulation period, for he that endures to the end&nbsp;<em>shall be saved</em>, but :22 explains that unless the days the 1260 days of the time periods? are shortened, then even the elect will not be “saved” (s:w:).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And this gospel of the kingdom</em>-</p><p> We wonder what is the intention of the emphasis upon “this” Gospel being preached. We are assisted in understanding by the way Matthew uses the same terms in <em><a href='B:470 26:13'>Mat 26:13</a></em>: “Wheresoever this Gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, which this woman has done, be told for a memorial to her”. The language is so similar that there is surely a connection. The Gospel records are transcripts of how those like Matthew originally preached the Gospel. Over time, the account they gave became written down, under inspiration. The Gospel message is, therefore, in the Gospel records. ‘This Gospel’ would therefore be a reference to Matthew’s Gospel record, which it was the intention of Matthew and those who had been converted by it to spread worldwide. This would explain why each of the Gospel records includes the incident of the woman anointing the Lord; wherever the Gospel was preached worldwide, that testimony to her would be included. Matthew was therefore proactively attempting to fulfil the Lord’s comment that the Gospel must be preached in all the world. He saw prophecy not so much as prediction but command. It could also be that the “this” connects with the end of :13, “shall be saved”. Salvation is the good news of the Kingdom. "Ye shall be hated of all nations for My name's sake" connects with "this Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached for a witness unto all nations" (<em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em>). “My name's sake" and the Gospel of the Kingdom's sake are interchangeable expressions (<em><a href='B:470 19:12'>Mat 19:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 19:29'>Mat 19:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 10:29'>Mar 10:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 18:29'>Luk 18:29</a></em>).</p><p><em>Shall be preached</em>-</p><p> This could be read as a commandment, not a mere prediction. In this case, the idea is that&nbsp;<em>when</em>&nbsp;the Gospel is preached to all the world, then “the end comes”. The marvel is that this amazing preaching will be undertaken by a minority within the believing community, since, according to the preceding verses, the majority will have fallen away. And even amongst those who remain faithful, some will be in prison, others killed. It could be argued that this Gospel preaching occurs specifically during the tribulation period. If we were to take the Gospel to the whole world now, then perhaps this would not be necessary. But in the first century, it was persecution which was necessary to get the disciples to obey their Lord’s command to spread the Gospel outwards from Jerusalem to the world. And it was persecution which made the fleeing Jewish Christians rub shoulders with Gentiles, and thus share the Gospel with them:&nbsp;</p><p><em>In the whole world</em>-</p><p> The first century fulfilment of these words mentioned in <em><a href='B:520 10:18'>Rom 10:18</a></em> and <em><a href='B:580 1:6'>Col 1:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:23'>Col 1:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:26'>Col 1:26</a></em> was because there was the potential that the Lord could have come in AD70. But the Greek word literally means ‘the inhabited’, and more naturally refers to the whole planet. He envisaged the possibility that the disciples would not have gone preaching over the cities of Israel before the end came (<em><a href='B:470 10:23'>Mat 10:23</a></em>). But He did come in AD70, and so the Lord's words here about a genuine worldwide witness must come true before He returns. Note the Gospel is to be preached “in”,&nbsp;<em>en</em>, all the world, and not ‘to’ the whole world. This may envisage there being believers in all the world who preach where they are. This would nowhere near have been fulfilled in the first century. Also, <em><a href='B:580 1:6'>Col 1:6</a></em> speaks of the Gospel having gone to the&nbsp;<em>kosmos</em>, whereas <em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em> requires the Gospel to be preached in the&nbsp;<em>oikoumene</em>:&nbsp;<em>Kosmos</em>&nbsp;is frequently used in the NT with reference to the&nbsp;<em>Jewish</em>&nbsp;world:&nbsp;<em>Oikoumene</em>&nbsp;has a more global and universal context and sense. <em><a href='B:480 13:10'>Mar 13:10</a></em> says that the Gospel must be published “among all nations” (Gk:&nbsp;<em>ethnos</em>), and this hardly occurred by AD70. Some parts of the Olivet prophecy had a limited application in the first century (e.g. <em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em> = <em><a href='B:470 10:18'>Mat 10:18</a></em>), but this doesn't mean that this is the&nbsp;<em>only</em>&nbsp;fulfilment of it. It is a feature of prophecy that it often has a short term fulfilment in order to validate the prophet in the eyes of his own generation. It would be strange indeed if the Olivet prophecy had&nbsp;<em>only</em>&nbsp;a short term fulfilment.</p><p>The great commission bids us go into all the world with Gospel; note the evident connection with <em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em>: "This Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come":&nbsp; This definitely suggests that the great commission will be mightily obeyed in the last days. There are many other Biblical implications that there will be an unprecedented spread of the Gospel to the whole planet in the last days. Thus <em><a href='B:340 12:4'>Dan 12:4</a></em> speaks of a time in the very last days when “many shall run to and fro (an idiom often used concerning response to God's word: <em><a href='B:230 119:32'>Psa 119:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 119:60'>Psa 119:60</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 147:15'>Psa 147:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:370 8:11-12'>Amo 8:11-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:420 2:2'>Hab 2:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 8:37'>Joh 8:37</a></em> RV; <em><a href='B:600 3:1'>2Th 3:1</a></em> Gk:), and knowledge shall be increased the context is of Daniel wanting to understand about the second coming of Jesus... many shall be purified, and made white, and tried (in the tribulation); but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand" . This increase of knowledge of the Gospel is to be spread world-wide by many running to and fro in the last days. The great commission will be fulfilled then as never before. <em><a href='B:340 11:32-33'>Dan 11:32-33</a></em> speaks of how in the time of the end "The people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits... instruct many”. &nbsp;Before every 'coming' of the Lord there has been a period of persecution and zealous preaching: Noah preached righteousness before the flood, as Lot probably tried to before the Lord's coming down in judgment on Sodom (would God have wrought such wholesale destruction without giving the people a chance to repent? Cp. Nineveh and Jonah). The schools of the prophets preached from the street corners and temple steps to warn of the coming of the day of the Lord at the hand of the Babylonians and Assyrians. And of course the dramatic coming of the Lord in judgment upon Israel in AD70, was heralded by Paul and his committed band of zealots staging the greatest preaching campaigns this world has seen. The crucial question, of course, is whether the Gospel has truly gone into all the world. One perspective to bear in mind is that in the preaching of Paul, ecclesias which he founded are taken as representing a whole area- e.g. Philippi is called "Macedonia" (<em><a href='B:570 4:15'>Phi 4:15</a></em>); Thessalonica is "Macedonia and Achaia" (<em><a href='B:590 1:7'>1Th 1:7</a></em>); Corinth is Achaia (<em><a href='B:530 16:15'>1Co 16:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 1:1'>2Co 1:1</a></em>); Ephesus for Asia (<em><a href='B:520 16:5'>Rom 16:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 16:19'>1Co 16:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 1:8'>2Co 1:8</a></em>). In this sense Paul felt that he had fully preached the Gospel in a circle, moving from Jerusalem through Asia to Rome, and projecting onwards to Spain. Perhaps the Gospel goes into all the world in the sense that believers, however small in number, are to be found world-wide. And that seems to be where we're now up to in the 21st century.</p><p>Paul seems to have seen in Christ's prophecy that the Gospel would be fully known world-wide in the last as being a specific, personal command to him (<em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em> = <em><a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a></em>):&nbsp;He saw prophecy as command more than solely prediction; and this is why prophecy has a degree of variation in how and when it is fulfilled. The words of <em><a href='B:480 16:15-16'>Mar 16:15-16</a></em> are clear: "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved". Commands to repent, all men, the Lord’s resurrection... these ideas all recur in <em><a href='B:510 17:30'>Act 17:30</a></em>, proving they are not solely relevant to those who first heard them; God now commands all men to repent, through our words. These words clearly don't apply to the first century only, for they are intended to be linked with <em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em>, which uses the same language about the preaching work of the very last days (even though the context may imply that as a community we will only be obedient to this command once egged on by major persecution). What all this means is that the great commission will be fulfilled in the last days. The connection with the great commission means that the Lord sent out the disciples in order to fulfil this aspect of the Olivet prophecy; but their failure to do the job fully meant that the prophecy had to be delayed and rescheduled in fulfilment.</p><p><em>For a testimony- The Gospel</em>&nbsp;was to be preached for a witness to all nations (<em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em>); and yet “<em>ye</em>&nbsp;are witnesses…&nbsp;<em>you</em>&nbsp;will be witnesses” (<em><a href='B:490 24:27'>Luk 24:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 1:8'>Act 1:8</a></em>). The preacher of the Gospel&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;the Gospel; the man is the message, just as the very same word / message was made flesh in the Lord. Israel of old were taught this. They were to keep and do the commandments of God, and&nbsp;<em>this</em>&nbsp;would be the witness of their wisdom and understanding to the nations around them- who would thereby be brought to Israel’s God (<em><a href='B:50 4:6-8'>Deu 4:6-8</a></em>). The imparting of wisdom and understanding therefore didn’t come so much through specific doctrinal exposition, as through living out those principles in daily life. But&nbsp;<em>marturion</em>, “witness”, can simply be a legal term referring to testimony or witness in a prosecution. Perhaps the sense is that judgment will come upon all the world once the Gospel has been witnessed to them; it is their receipt of that information which gives them the knowledge which makes them responsible to Divine judgment. For once this witness has been made, then the end comes.</p><p><em>To all the nations-&nbsp;</em>If every&nbsp;<em>ethnos&nbsp;</em>must at least have the Gospel of the Kingdom witnessed to them, it’s impossible to understand this as having had final fulfilment in AD70. The fact there will be believers from every&nbsp;<em>ethnos&nbsp;</em>saved (<em><a href='B:730 5:9'>Rev 5:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 7:9'>Rev 7:9</a></em>) means that this witness will succeed- against all odds, seeing that at the time, there will be mass persecution and hatred against believers. "Ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake" connects with "this Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached for a witness unto all nations" (<em><a href='B:470 24:39'>Mat 24:39</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em>). "My name's sake" and the Gospel of the Kingdom's sake are interchangeable expressions (<em><a href='B:470 19:12'>Mat 19:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 19:29'>Mat 19:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 10:29'>Mar 10:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 18:29'>Luk 18:29</a></em>). Before every 'coming' of the Lord there has been a period of persecution and zealous preaching: Noah preached righteousness before the flood, as Lot probably tried to before the Lord's coming down in judgment on Sodom (would God have wrought such wholesale destruction without giving the people a chance to repent? Cp. Nineveh and Jonah). The schools of the prophets preached from the street corners and temple steps to warn of the coming of the day of the Lord at the hand of the Babylonians and Assyrians. And of course the dramatic coming of the Lord in judgment upon Israel in AD70, was heralded by Paul and his committed band of zealots staging the greatest preaching campaigns this world has seen. The word used in <em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em> for “witness to all nations” occurs in <em><a href='B:470 10:18'>Mat 10:18</a></em> concerning our being brought before judges etc. as a witness. Our behaviour during the final tribulation is the witness- perhaps the implication could be that there will be quiet believers world-wide before the final tribulation begins, and their witness under persecution will be the public proclamation of the Gospel world-wide of which the Lord speaks here? In the spread of the true Gospel recently we perhaps see the way for this being prepared. The word also occurs in the parallel <em><a href='B:490 21:13'>Luk 21:13</a></em> - our behaviour during the final tribulation will be the witness we make. The reluctance of the early church to throw their full weight behind obeying the command to " go into all the world and preach the Gospel" was only ended by the cosy ecclesias of Judea being persecuted, resulting in their increased appreciation of their hope, and preaching it to those previously neglected nations into which they were driven (<em><a href='B:510 11:19-22'>Act 11:19-22</a></em>). Are the Christian heartlands in for something similar? That the mission fields are so white to the harvest but so chronically short of labourers&nbsp;indicates how nicely such a scenario would work to God's glory.</p><p><em>And then shall the end come</em>-</p><p> The Lord gave some signs which would be required but would not be the “end” (:6 “the end is not yet”). It would seem that the urgent spreading of the Gospel as a witness worldwide, perhaps in the context of well publicized legal cases against believers, will be the very final sign which heralds “the end”. This witness to the Gospel worldwide would therefore be during the tribulation itself, or at least at some point between verses 6 and 14. The witness may therefore take a matter of days, rather than the gradual spread of the Gospel worldwide over a matter of decades. With the nature of the media and instant communication, such global penetration and persuasion of a minority could indeed happen in a matter of days. The high profile, globally covered testimony under tribulation or torture of even one believer could trigger the conversion of individuals literally worldwide. Perhaps the prophecy of the two witnesses in the last days in Revelation 11 provides more details, or will then be understood as being fulfilled. Even if we cannot quite imagine now how it will be fulfilled, when the time comes for it to be, it will be compellingly clear.</p>


text:
<p>24:15&nbsp;<em>Therefore, when you see</em>-</p><p> Luke adds “Jerusalem compassed by armies”. Jerusalem was truly “compassed with armies” in Hezekiah’s time, and perhaps the Lord has this in mind when He predicted that Jerusalem would again be like this in the last days. His subsequent warning to those in the country areas not running into Jerusalem for refuge is also an allusion to the situation in Hezekiah’s time- for this was exactly what happened then (<em><a href='B:490 21:20-21'>Luk 21:20-21</a></em> RV). The “therefore”,&nbsp;<em>oun</em>, need not necessarily reference the previous clause. It may be setting up a condition upon which something must be done- in this case, fleeing (:16).</p><p><em>The abomination</em>-</p><p> The word is mainly used elsewhere about the abominations of the Babylon system (<em><a href='B:730 17:4-5'>Rev 17:4-5</a></em>). I would suggest that once the rescheduling of Christ's return was decided by God, the Gospel of John was issued, with its more spiritual interpretation of the Olivet prophecy in terms of the Comforter, and the teaching that the principles of the tribulation are to be lived out throughout the lives of believers. And John was likewise inspired with the prophecy of Revelation, which is clearly based upon the Olivet prophecy and provides further details as to how the prophecy is to be fulfilled in the last days, with the events of AD70 being a partial fulfilment in order to give the prophecy credibility with the generation that first received it. This would be according to the Mosaic principle that a prophet could be judged as true if his words came true- requiring a primary fulfilment of all long term prophecies.</p><p><em>Of desolation-&nbsp;</em>Luke records the Lord as saying that&nbsp;<em>when</em>&nbsp;Jerusalem was surrounded by armies,&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;His people should know that the "desolation" of it was near. The desolation is therefore of Jerusalem rather than specifically the temple (<em><a href='B:490 21:20'>Luk 21:20</a></em>). The abominating desolation could therefore refer to the invading armies. Seeing&nbsp;<em>them&nbsp;</em>was the signal to flee. "Abomination" in the Old Testament typically refers to idolatry or paganism. One interpretation is that the desolator would place some pagan religious symbol in the temple. But this is the sign to flee, and this was only done by the Romans after the city had fallen. That, therefore, doesn’t really fit the requirements of the prophecy. The AD70 interpretation notes the pagan standards of the Roman legions, but even they were not placed in the temple. This was defended until the end, until the Romans forced entry, pulled it down and burnt it. As with many details of this prophecy, a future fulfilment is required. And yet we need to note that such desolation was only a visual reflection of the abomination the Jews had committed in the temple: "Because of the evil of your doings, and because of the&nbsp;<em>abominations&nbsp;</em>which ye have committed; therefore is your land a&nbsp;<em>desolation&nbsp;</em>and an astonishment, and a curse, without an inhabitant, as at this day" (<em><a href='B:300 44:22'>Jer 44:22</a></em>). The abomination which caused desolation may not simply refer to some pagan symbols in the temple area. Josephus records that the Jewish zealots came into the Most Holy place, "placed an imposter in office as high priest, and ordained unqualified misfits to the priesthood" (<em>The Jewish Wars</em>&nbsp;4:3:6–9; 4:5:4). The pagan Idumeans were invited into the Most Holy by the zealots in order to murder the chief priest Annas.</p><p>The word "desolation" is used again about the desolation of the Babylon system (<em><a href='B:730 17:16'>Rev 17:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 18:17'>Rev 18:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 18:19'>Rev 18:19</a></em>). Yet Babylon will be judged according to what it did to God's people- the judgment for 'desolating' will be 'desolation'. Yet the Olivet prophecy clearly intended the Roman armies to be the means of the desolation, but I suggest that Revelation extends the prophecy by giving more detail, and describing the system of desolation as 'Babylon'. And that system clearly has similarities with Rome- it could have been fulfilled in Rome, but because the fulfilment of the prophecy was rescheduled, we can look for another equivalent of the enigmatic 'Babylon' of the last days. The "desolation" referred to is clearly to be understood as the fulfilment of <em><a href='B:340 9:26-27'>Dan 9:26-27</a></em> LXX, which says that the abomination that desolates will come "after the cutting off of Messiah the Prince". Whilst how long "after" is not defined, we are surely intended to understand that the desolating abomination comes soon after the death of Messiah:&nbsp; "The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and&nbsp;<em>the end&nbsp;</em>thereof ("then shall&nbsp;<em>the end</em>&nbsp;come", <em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em>) shall be with a flood, ("as the days of Noah..."), and unto&nbsp;<em>the end&nbsp;</em>shall be war;&nbsp;<em>desolations&nbsp;</em>are determined . . . and upon the temple of&nbsp;<em>abominations&nbsp;</em>shall come one that makes&nbsp;<em>desolate&nbsp;</em>(cp. "your house is left unto you desolate", <em><a href='B:470 23:38'>Mat 23:38</a></em>),&nbsp; even unto the consummation, and that determined shall be poured out upon the desolated" (LXX). And yet note that that prophecy itself had had various potential fulfilments which didn’t come true. So it is fair to think that it could have had a fulfilment in AD70, but this was again deferred- for the same reason as ever, Israel’s lack of repentance (see the Digression ‘Conditional Prophecy in Daniel’).</p><p><em>Which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place-</em></p><p>&nbsp;Mk. "where it ought not". "Holy place" is without the article, and could refer to any holy place. The contrast is with the Lamb who will descend to the temple mount and "stand" there s:w. <em><a href='B:730 14:1'>Rev 14:1</a></em>. This will be the final showdown between the real Christ and the fake one, as likewise foreseen in the prophecy of the man of sin in 2 Thessalonians 2, where again the place of showdown is the temple. For this to be a sign to the believers to flee to the mountains, any application to the triumphant Roman legions placing their standards in the temple at the&nbsp;<em>end</em>&nbsp;of the Jewish war is precluded. And historically, it is doubtful whether that happened, as the temple was burnt with fire and the legions were told&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;to do this.</p><p><em>Let him that reads understand</em>-</p><p> The vast majority of first century believers were likely illiterate. So this may be an appeal to teachers to correctly understand and teach. The Lord speaks in a latter day context about “let him that readeth understand” Daniel’s prophecies (<em><a href='B:480 13:14'>Mar 13:14</a></em>)- referring to the special gift of understanding them which Daniel himself was told would come in the very end time. But note the parallels in the Lord’s teaching here: “Let him… understand… let him… not go down… let him… not return… let them… flee”. The understanding He refers to is not merely academic. It is the understanding that will lead to concrete action.</p><p>The Lord's Olivet prophecy as recorded by Mark has so many allusions to the Maccabean revolt under Mattathias ("the abomination", flight to the hills, "let the reader understand" and many other phrases are all quotations from 1 Maccabees 1-3). But in this context the Lord warns of false Messiahs- as if He considered the Maccabean heroes to be just that. And interestingly it is Mark more than any other Gospel writer who stresses the Messiahship of Jesus throughout the crucifixion record. A crucified Messiah was to the Jews a contradiction in terms. The idea of Jewish revolutionaries marching triumphantly to Jerusalem to liberate it was common in Jewish thought at the time- but Luke emphasizes that Christ's last journey to Jerusalem and triumphant entry to it was in fact in order to die the death of the cross there. The battle had been redefined by the Lord Jesus- not against Rome, but against internal sin and Jewish religious hypocrisy. Victory was by self-crucifixion, not military might. This was just too much for Jewish nationalism, just as legalists today end up baying for the blood of those who preach grace and not works:&nbsp;</p><p>There are a number of hints that there will be a progressive growth in Biblical understanding amongst the latter day faithful. In the spirit of <em><a href='B:340 12:4'>Dan 12:4</a></em>, Habakkuk was told that the full understanding of his vision concerning the latter day judgment of Babylon was " yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie", and&nbsp;<em>at that time</em>&nbsp;the one who reads and understands it will "run" - using the same idiom as in <em><a href='B:340 12:4'>Dan 12:4</a></em> concerning the latter day believers 'running' in response to their understanding of God's word (<em><a href='B:420 2:2-3'>Hab 2:2-3</a></em>). The Olivet prophecy repeatedly talks about 'seeing' or (Gk:) understanding things and then acting upon this knowledge. The English translation somewhat masks this. Thus <em><a href='B:470 24:15'>Mat 24:15</a></em> "Whoso&nbsp;<em>readeth</em>" uses a Greek word which really means to recognize, distinguish- and he who recognizes, understands, let him " understand" or, better,&nbsp;<em>meditate</em>. Or again, "When ye shall see (Greek, to know, perceive) the abomination that maketh desolate..." (<em><a href='B:470 24:15'>Mat 24:15</a></em>). This might suggest that the "abomination" isn't necessarily something physical. The idea seems to be 'When you understand that the abomination that makes desolate is in place, then…', rather than 'When you see (physically) on the telly or in the newspaper an abomination in Jerusalem, then... do something about it':&nbsp; "When ye shall see (Gk. perceive, understand) all these things, (then you will) know that it is near" (<em><a href='B:470 24:33'>Mat 24:33</a></em>). "Behold (same Greek: perceive, comprehend) the fig tree..." (<em><a href='B:490 21:29'>Luk 21:29</a></em>). The emphasis is undoubtedly on the need for understanding of the signs, not just observing them.</p><p>“Let him that reads understand” is inviting us to be like Daniel in <em><a href='B:340 9:22-25'>Dan 9:22-25</a></em>, who also wanted to understand the meaning of the “abomination” prophecy. But he was told that the meaning of that vision about the abomination that desolates would only be revealed in the very last days, i:e. at the time of its fulfilment (<em><a href='B:340 8:17'>Dan 8:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:340 8:26'>Dan 8:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:340 12:9'>Dan 12:9</a></em>). The implication of all this is that there will be believing Jews living in the Jerusalem area at the time of the setting up of the abomination; and they will have special understanding of this prophecy which will lead them to flee. The importance of this for our present study is that this indicates that there will be believers in Israel just before the Lord returns. They will have “understanding” and will be motivated by this to respond. “<em>Let him</em>… understand” is paralleled with “<em>let him</em>&nbsp;that is on the housetop flee immediately…&nbsp;<em>let him&nbsp;</em>that is in the field not return”. Understanding leads to action- both then and now.</p><p>"Let him that readeth understand" is yet another Olivet allusion back to Daniel (12:10); yet generations of believers have read those very words and&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;understood. Presumably the latter day remnant&nbsp;<em>will</em>&nbsp;clearly understand Daniel's enigmatic words about the abomination. Whilst we should live<em>&nbsp;as if</em>&nbsp;we expect the Lord's imminent return, it has to be said that we don't seem to have yet reached this level of understanding. "When ye shall see (Gk. perceive, understand) all these things, (then you will) know that it is near" (<em><a href='B:470 24:33'>Mat 24:33</a></em>). "Behold (same Greek: perceive, comprehend) the fig tree..." (<em><a href='B:490 21:29'>Luk 21:29</a></em>). The emphasis is undoubtedly on the need for understanding of the signs, not just observing them. The expansion of understanding may be not only of prophecies like Habakkuk, Daniel and Revelation. Because Revelation especially is so full of reference to other passages throughout the Scriptures, our comprehension of the whole Bible will go into another paradigm. It may be that in the last days,&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;the words of God will in some sense be fulfilled (<em><a href='B:730 17:17'>Rev 17:17</a></em>)- we will realize that the whole Bible is especially speaking to us, the last generation. Many of the parables are specifically aimed at the last generation of believers- they have a very secondary application to believers of other ages. They are specifically about the attitudes of those who will be alive when the Lord comes in glory; e.g. the wise and foolish virgins, or the men given talents, or the servants left watching the household etc. The Lord's letters in Revelation speak of him being about to come, as do many other NT passages. They were written specifically for the last generation of believers Their full meaning and relevance will therefore only be perceived by that generation. Take <em><a href='B:730 3:20'>Rev 3:20</a></em> as an example: "I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me". Whatever else this may be taken to mean, according to its connections with other passages, this is clearly relevant to the Lord's second coming; the believer who responds to the Lord's voice in the last days will be rewarded with the Lord's coming. Verses like this and the parables mentioned above are pre-eminently relevant to the last generation. No wonder there will be a growth in understanding in the last days</p>


text:
<p>24:16&nbsp;<em>Then let those who are in Judea flee</em>-</p><p> The same word was used by the Lord in introducing the Olivet prophecy in <em><a href='B:470 23:33'>Mat 23:33</a></em>: "How can you&nbsp;<em>escape</em>&nbsp;the condemnation of Gehenna?". The way of escape was through obedience to His word. Clearly the Lord intended His words to be fulfilled in that immediate generation; but fleeing to the mountains did not bring ultimate salvation because the Lord did not return as intended. His coming has been rescheduled, and perhaps utter salvation for the Jewish remnant in the land will likewise depend upon 'fleeing'. The Old Covenant had specified that Israel would flee before their enemies if they broke the covenant; the command to 'flee' may therefore be an invitation to accept guilt for their sin, and thereby be saved through the very act of recognizing the justice of their judgment. For this is the essence of the salvation of every man in Christ. It could be that <em><a href='B:730 12:6'>Rev 12:6</a></em> provides more details, in speaking of the faithful fleeing into the wilderness and thereby being saved. This was the way to flee the coming condemnation (<em><a href='B:470 23:33'>Mat 23:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 3:7'>Luk 3:7</a></em>). The Lord's words required some faith to accept, because if Jerusalem were surrounded by armies, how could the faithful flee? Josephus explains that the Roman legions did in fact withdraw for a time, allowing civilians to flee (B:J:2:19:6,7).</p><p><em>To the mountains</em>-</p><p> Better, 'toward'. Clearly this was capable of fulfilment in the Jewish war, in a fairly literal sense. But what is the latter day equivalent? "The mountains" could be an intensive plural for the one great, special, obvious mountain. The same word is found earlier in the chapter- the Lord is saying these words sitting on "the mount" of Olives (:3). And it is to that mount that He will return, according to <em><a href='B:510 1:12'>Act 1:12</a></em> and Zechariah 14. It could be, therefore, in a literal or figurative sense, an appeal to move towards the mount of Olives to meet Him at His return. Perhaps in a literal, geographical sense, that area will be the only area left by the invading armies, and they will surround the faithful Jewish remnant on that mount- and then the Lord shall come. But such speculation is unhelpful, because the principle of prophecy is that when it happens, then we shall understand. I do not believe we are intended to work out a sequence of events ahead of time. Indeed, given the conditional nature of Bible prophecy, that is impossible to do anyway:&nbsp;</p><p>As the faithful remnant were miraculously allowed to leave Sodom for the mountains, immediately unleashing the Divine judgments by doing so, the faithful Christian remnant were allowed to leave Jerusalem just before the final Roman onslaught of AD70, doubtless spurred on by their Lord's command: "Let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it (Jerusalem) depart out" (<em><a href='B:490 21:21'>Luk 21:21</a></em>). The reference to fleeing to the mountains would have suggested a conscious allusion back to&nbsp;the command to Lot to flee out of Sodom "to the mountain" (<em><a href='B:10 19:17'>Gen 19:17</a></em>):&nbsp;"Then let them which be in Judaea flee to the mountains" may mean that there will be Jewish believers in Jerusalem in the last days, seeing the whole prophecy has yet to be totally fulfilled (the AD70 application of these words was at best limited). <em><a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a></em> says that in the final tribulation of Israel, those Jews who are "written in the book", i:e. who are acceptable saints (<em><a href='B:20 32:32'>Exo 32:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 21:27'>Rev 21:27</a></em>) will be delivered. So there will be a minority in latter day natural Israel who have not bowed the knee to Baal, as in Elijah's time- which is typical of the situation at the latter day Elijah ministry. This is certainly encouragement enough to make witness to and within Israel a priority.</p>


text:
<p>24:17&nbsp;<em>Let him that is on the housetop-&nbsp;</em>The idea is that flight could be taken by jumping from housetop to housetop, without going back into the house. Escaping that way would best be done in any case without carrying anything. This is clearly language relevant specifically to first century Palestine, and is a parade example of how the prophecy was ideally intended for fulfilment then. The latter day fulfilment of these words will therefore only be in essence, rather than in detail. That is a principle we must bear in mind when considering many other Bible prophecies; the essence but not necessarily the detail will be fulfilled in the rescheduled and delayed version of their fulfilment. The implication of the language here and in :18 is that the sign to flee will be momentary; the signs are not, therefore, to be perceived over decades or even years, leading slowly towards the Lord’s coming. Rather these signs, especially of the abomination, will appear suddenly, to the extent that the believer must flee immediately, quite literally without a moment to lose.</p><p>But this reflection leads us to wonder whether the fleeing away in a split second, be it from the field or housetop, is more likely a reference to the need to respond immediately to the call to leave secular life and go to meet the Lord. The example of a person in the field (:18) needing to leave immediately naturally connects with the words of :40 about the snatching away of the believers at the Lord’s return: “Two shall be in the field, the one shall be taken, and the other left”. This would dovetail well with the implication elsewhere that the immediacy of our response to the knowledge that ‘He’s back’ will effectively be our judgment. Those who themselves want to go to Him will be snatched away and meet Him, whilst those who delay will be rejected, as the foolish virgins who went first to buy oil.</p><p><em>Not go down to take out things that are in his house</em>-</p><p> The allusion is clearly to Lot fleeing Sodom, also “to the mountains” (:16). This is a type of the response of the believers to the call to judgment at the Lord’s return. If we don’t separate from the world, we will share their judgment. The immediacy of response is so stressed, and will be ultimately indicative of where our heart Is. Any desire to gather any material possessions will reveal that our heart is not wholly and solely with the Lord. But the Greek could equally mean ‘to take anyone person out of his house / family’. This again is a high demand- the demand of the Sermon on the Mount, to put family in second place behind personal loyalty to the Lord Jesus. All who love the Lord in spirit and in truth will respond to the sign or call to leave with immediacy. They will know that in any case, they are powerless to drag their unbelieving family members with them.</p>


text:
<p>24:18&nbsp;<em>And let him that is in the field not return back to take his cloak</em>-</p><p> The immediacy of response is clear. Even grabbing an outer garment, equivalent of a jacket, would lead to unworthiness and destruction. The call to leave must be responded to immediately, with the faith that what clothing we have on is utterly irrelevant. This only really makes sense if the call or sign to escape is the call to judgment- and this verse connects with the words of :40 about the snatching away of the believers at the Lord’s return: “Two shall be in the field, the one shall be taken, and the other left”. See on :17.</p>


text:
<p>24:19&nbsp;<em>But woe to them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days-</em></p><p>&nbsp;This may well match Paul's warning against marrying&nbsp;in the last days in 1 Corinthians 7. He understood the Olivet prophecy as having the real prophecy of fulfilment in his generation. As He hung on the cross, our Lord quoted this part of His Olivet prophecy to the women who stood by (<em><a href='B:490 23:29'>Luk 23:29</a></em> “blessed are those who never gave suck” = <em><a href='B:470 24:19'>Mat 24:19</a></em> “Woe to them… who give sick”, s:w:), concerning the sufferings of the believers in the 'last days'. Here we see His matchless selflessness; going out of His own sufferings, to think, with anguish, how they would be experienced by His followers in the tribulation. "Weep not for me, but weep for yourselves... for if they do these things (to) a green tree (the spiritually healthy Lord Jesus), what shall be done (to) the dry", the spiritually barren tree of Israel. This is a superb essay in the Lord's selflessness and minimizing of his own sufferings: he felt that what he was going through was less than what the spiritually weak would have to go through in the AD70 tribulation (and that of the last days). In the other 11 occurrences of “woe” in Matthew, the objects of the “woe” are clearly the unfaithful and the condemned; this category of those “with child” are therefore not amongst those who obediently ‘flee’. <em><a href='B:490 21:23'>Luk 21:23</a></em> states that they would be amongst those who would suffer the “wrath upon this people”. In <em><a href='B:490 23:29'>Luk 23:29</a></em> the Lord clearly envisaged the women of His generation, the ones who lined the road to Golgotha, as experiencing the trauma He predicted in the Olivet prophecy. And yet it is clear enough that the final fulfilment is yet to come- because His coming was rescheduled.</p>


text:
<p>24:20&nbsp;<em>And pray that your flight is not in the winter, nor on a Sabbath</em>-</p><p>&nbsp; The "flight" refers to the opportunity given to the civilians of Jerusalem to flee. These opportunities were in October AD67 and in Spring AD70. "The Sabbath" refers more likely to the Sabbath Year rather than to the weekly Sabbath. There would've been little food in the Sabbath year because the land was not to be planted that year. The Sabbath year at the time was AD68/69 (the last Sabbath year ever observed in the land). So perhaps we can reason from these facts that the Lord's words were heeded, the faithful did pray as He recommended- and so they did not flee in Winter (but rather in Autumn 67 and Spring 70), nor in the Sabbath year:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>The Lord’s request for prayer indicates that the exact timing of events in the tribulation will be changeable in accordance with the fervency of our latter day prayers. Changeable time periods has been a feature of God’s prophetic dealings with Israel (see the Digression ‘Conditional Prophecy in Daniel’); and :22 is explicit that the intended number of days will be shortened. An AD70 application for this is hard to find; it may be that the exact timing of the Roman offer of amnesty was dependent on the intensity of prayer by the besieged Jerusalem ecclesia. That ecclesia, rent as they were by&nbsp;schism, false doctrine and materialism (if we accept the evidence that Hebrews was addressed to them) was a type of the faithful remnant of the last days. They were finally sorted out by the events of AD67 - 70, cp. the latter day tribulation.</p><p><em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em> adds: "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled". The allusion is to <em><a href='B:340 8:13'>Dan 8:13</a></em>: "The transgression of desolation gave both the sanctuary and the host (i:e. the people of Israel) to be&nbsp;<em>trodden underfoot":&nbsp;&nbsp;</em>This part of Luke 21 is clearly alluding to Zechariah 14, a prophecy about the final desolation of Jerusalem:</p><p><table border="1"><tr><td></p><p><em><a href='B:490 21:20-24'>Luk 21:20-24</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:450 14:2'>Zec 14:2</a></em><em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></em>20.</td><td>Jerusale m surrounded by armies</td><td>2.</td><td>All nations against Jerusalem to battle</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>20.</td><td>The desolation of Jerusalem is near</td><td>2.</td><td>The city shall be taken</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>21.</td><td>Let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains</td><td>5.</td><td>You shall flee to the ... mountains</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>22.</td><td>Great distress in the land</td><td>2.</td><td>Houses ransacked, women raped.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>24.</td><td>Led away captive into all nations</td><td>2.</td><td>Half the city shall go into captivity</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>24.</td><td>Jerusalem trodden down by the Gentiles.</td><td><em><a href='B:450 12:3'>Zec 12:3</a></em></td><td>LXX Jerusalem a stone trodden down by the Gentiles.</td><td></td></tr></table><p>The context of Zechariah 14 is clearly concerning the last days and the literal appearance of Messiah in Israel. The way the Olivet Prophecy alludes to it, indeed is based upon it, shows that it too requires reference to the last days. Any limited fulfilment in AD70 was only a partial foretaste of the final outworking of the prophecy. I have explained in the digression about ‘Conditional Prophecy in Daniel’ that <em><a href='B:340 8:13'>Dan 8:13</a></em> itself was a prophecy which had already had various possible fulfilments but had already had its fulfilment rescheduled a few times. It is therefore unsurprising if its intended, or possible, fulfilment in AD70 was again rescheduled.</p>


text:
<p>24:21&nbsp;<em>For then</em>-</p><p> Mk:, “in those days”. <em><a href='B:480 13:19'>Mar 13:19</a></em> speaks of how "in those days" those in Judaea should flee to the mountains; "for&nbsp;<em>in those days</em>&nbsp;shall be affliction, such as was not from the beginning of creation... neither shall be (referring to <em><a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a></em> concerning our last days)... except that the Lord had shortened&nbsp;<em>those days</em>…&nbsp;<em>in those days</em>, after that tribulation…&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;shall they see the son of man coming". Surely “in those days" shouts for a continuous application to the same "days" - the days of the second coming, the days during which the obedient ‘flee’ (and I have suggested that may be in response to the Angelic invitation to go meet the returning Lord Jesus). At best, "those days" can have a primary reference to the events of AD70, but the&nbsp;<em>main</em>&nbsp;fulfilment of the whole prophecy must be in the last days. This point seems impossible to answer by those who disallow any reference to the second coming.</p><p><em>Shall be great tribulation</em>-</p><p> The LXX uses this same word for “tribulation” in several passages pregnant with latter day significance:&nbsp;</p><p>“The day of my Jacob’s&nbsp;<em>distress</em>” at the hands of Esau (<em><a href='B:10 35:3'>Gen 35:3</a></em>)</p><p>“The&nbsp;<em>anguish</em>&nbsp;of his Joseph’s soul” at the hands of his half brethren and the Ishmaelites (<em><a href='B:10 42:21'>Gen 42:21</a></em>)</p><p>“I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and&nbsp;<em>troubles&nbsp;</em>shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God is not among us?” (<em><a href='B:50 31:17'>Deu 31:17</a></em>)- a passage in the Song of Moses regarding Israel’s latter day tribulations:&nbsp;</p><p>“Thus saith Hezekiah, This day is a day of&nbsp;<em>trouble</em>, and of rebuke, and blasphemy” (<em><a href='B:120 19:3'>2Ki 19:3</a></em>)”- Sennacherib’s Assyrian invasion at this time was a clear prototype for the latter day invasion described in Ezekiel 38 and elsewhere:&nbsp;</p><p>“The time of Jacob’s&nbsp;<em>trouble</em>” from which he will be delivered (<em><a href='B:300 30:7'>Jer 30:7</a></em>)</p><p>The “day of trouble” in Hezekiah’s time, when Jerusalem again was surrounded by armies (<em><a href='B:290 37:3'>Isa 37:3</a></em>), and saved by a visible ‘coming’ of the Lord against the Assyrian confederacy.</p><p>“There shall be a time of&nbsp;<em>trouble</em>, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book” (<em><a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a></em>). This time of trouble is specifically for Israel in the last days. This verse would appear to be in the Lord’s mind at this time. The same Hebrew phrase for “day of trouble” is repeatedly used about the traumas of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonian and Assyrian invaders (<em><a href='B:290 33:2'>Isa 33:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 37:3'>Isa 37:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 65:16'>Isa 65:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 4:31'>Jer 4:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 6:24'>Jer 6:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 14:8'>Jer 14:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 15:11'>Jer 15:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 16:19'>Jer 16:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 30:7'>Jer 30:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:380 1:12'>Oba 1:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:380 1:14'>Oba 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:430 1:15'>Zep 1:15</a></em>). These historical situations were clearly intended to be understood as precursors of the final tribulation of Jerusalem, again at the hands of the neighbouring nations. The time of “trouble”&nbsp;<em>tsarah</em>&nbsp;in <em><a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a></em> is literally ‘the time of the enemy / adversary’, and the same word is used of the time (<em><a href='B:190 4:14'>Est 4:14</a></em>) of the enemy and adversary&nbsp;<em>tsar</em>&nbsp;in <em><a href='B:190 7:4'>Est 7:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:190 7:6'>Est 7:6</a></em>, when again the Jews were threatened with destruction at the hand of the Agagite / Gog of Haman.</p><p><em>Since the beginning of the world</em>-</p><p> <em><a href='B:480 13:19'>Mar 13:19</a></em> “From the beginning of creation”. But the allusion is to <em><a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a></em>, “Since there was a nation”, and the context suggests the idea is ‘Since&nbsp;<em>Israel</em>&nbsp;were ever a nation’. The “world” in view may therefore be the Jewish world, and “creation” is being used as Judaism sometimes used the term, to refer to the creation of the nation at Sinai. The use of the phrase “the beginning of creation” rather than just “creation” would suggest that the creation of the world in view was an ongoing process, which is a beautiful insight into the nature of God’s natural and spiritual work with the world of believers, with Israel, and even with the natural creation.</p><p><em>Until now, no, nor ever shall be</em>-</p><p> surely only applicable to the last days, the time of Jacob’s trouble predicted in Jeremiah. Clearly the main fulfilment cannot be limited to AD70. The threat to “all flesh” in :22 likewise cannot be seriously applied to the situation of AD70. The language of <em><a href='B:490 21:28'>Luk 21:28</a></em> is also impossible to apply to AD70: “But when these things begin to take place, straighten up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near”. The allusion is obviously to <em><a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a></em>: “A time of trouble such as never was”. I have shown in the digression ‘Conditional Prophecy in Daniel’ that this particular prophecy had various possible fulfilments; and in harmony with that history, it could have been fulfilled in AD70, that was the intention, but the preconditions were not all fulfilled, and therefore its ultimate fulfilment was delayed until the final ‘last days’. The “time of trouble” in <em><a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a></em> is after Michael ‘stands up’, after the visible manifestation either of the Lord Jesus personally, or the Angel Michael who represented Him in the court of Heaven. The “time of trouble” is therefore in the very last days, perhaps literally days, the “then” of this verse 21 in Matthew 24, the time when the faithful have already dropped their jackets and left their homes to go to meet the Lord. It is inappropriate, therefore, to describe our present times&nbsp;<em>before</em>&nbsp;that period as “the time of trouble such that never was”. And it may be that <em><a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a></em> specifically refers to this unprecedented time of trouble as being for&nbsp;<em>Israel</em>-</p><p> trouble such as never was since they were a nation.</p>


text:
<p>24:22&nbsp;<em>And except those days had been shortened</em>-</p><p> The Babylonians besieged Jerusalem for a year before it fell, but the Roman siege lasted about five months- according to Josephus, from April 14 to September 8. God can shorten intended time periods at will, for time is seen by Him in a different dimension and context to our experience of it. According to <em><a href='B:100 24:15-16'>2Sa 24:15-16</a></em> LXX, it would seem that the three days of intended plague became one day, because of David's prayer and repentance, and God's pity; "the Lord repented Him of the evil":&nbsp;It seems this shortening happened- for <em><a href='B:530 7:29'>1Co 7:29</a></em> RV says that “the time is shortened”, in clear allusion to the Lord’s words here. Perhaps this is why it was intended that there be 40 years from AD33 the crucifixion to the destruction of the temple; but this period was “shortened” by at least 3 years “for the elect’s sake”. And the situation in the 1st century is evidently typical of ours today in these last days. They were to pray that their flight be not on the Sabbath or in the Winter, i:e. that the abomination that made desolate would not be set up at those times. Clearly prayer affected the exact chronology of events and thereby the fulfilment of prophecy.</p>&nbsp;<p>The Greek tense specifically means that the days had already been shortened. And yet the verse concludes with the future tense: “The days will be shortened”. The Lord Jesus was confident that although the shortening was yet future, it had in essence been achieved. This may well have been by the Lord’s intercession. In this case, <em><a href='B:480 13:20'>Mar 13:20</a></em> would be a comment inserted by the evangelist, referring to the Lord Jesus: “The Lord had shortened the days… He has shortened the days”. See on&nbsp;<em>The elect</em>. According to the parable of <em><a href='B:490 13:8'>Luk 13:8</a></em>, the Lord Jesus had persuaded the Father to extend an intended time period for Israel’s repentance, and had gained at least another year or half year of patient waiting for spiritual fruit on Israel. It’s quite possible, therefore, that the intended “days” of suffering had already been reduced by the Lord’s intercession, because He foresaw the weakness of the latter day “elect”; and also, simply was heartbroken at the prospect of all the suffering He was predicting. <em><a href='B:680 3:12'>2Pe 3:12</a></em> says we can hasten the coming of the day of the Lord- perhaps the Lord was speaking in faith that elect would indeed hasten it and thereby shorten the days. Hence He speaks in both past and future tenses concerning the shortening of the days. And yet on the other hand, it is the delay of judgment which allows opportunity for repentance and salvation (<em><a href='B:680 3:15'>2Pe 3:15</a></em>). Thus in the final algorithm controlling the coming of Christ, there are delay factors and hastening factors. The vision will in one sense “not delay / tarry” (<em><a href='B:420 2:3'>Hab 2:3</a></em> RV). And yet the same verse speaks of how it does “tarry”. Perhaps in a human sense it delays, but not from God’s perspective. “It hasteth toward the end” (<em><a href='B:420 2:3'>Hab 2:3</a></em> RV) could imply that things are speeded up in their fulfilment in the very end time; for the elects sake the days until the second coming are shortened (<em><a href='B:480 13:20'>Mar 13:20</a></em>). And yet things are also delayed- the bridegroom tarries / delays, to the point that many realize that the Lord has delayed His coming, and begin to act inappropriately. One reconciliation of these paradoxes could be that some prophecies are speeded up in their fulfilment because of the elect would otherwise lose their faith; and yet other prophecies seem to be delayed in fulfilment because of the unspirituality of others:&nbsp; The possibility of changing the fulfilment of prophetic time periods is to be found in <em><a href='B:420 3:2'>Hab 3:2</a></em>: "In the midst of the years revive..."- i:e. please, God, do it immediately rather than waiting until the end of days. The difference in tenses between “has shortened” and “will shorten” may also simply reflect how God conceives of time in a radically different way to how we do. The shortening of time in a sense hasn't take place, but in another sense it has. There can therefore be no trite explanation of how God can hasten the second coming in accordance with our prayers, and yet also have a set time to favour Zion.</p><p>With so many allusions to Daniel’s prophecies, perhaps "the days" in view are those of Daniel’s various prophecies. Perhaps this is the explanation of the 1260, 1290 and 1335 days in Daniel 12; and the otherwise difficult reference to 2300 days in Daniel 8. As suggested in the digression about ‘Conditional Prophecy in Daniel’, these time periods may have referred to potential periods which had the possibility of extension and reduction- in accordance with the strange mixture of Divine grace, the intercession of Jesus, the prayers of believers, the repentance of Israel… and perhaps other factors. In Daniel’s own experience, the 70 years of exile was a period which was extended. “The days” are likened to “the days of Noah” (:37). In the days of Noah again there was the possibility that no flesh would have been saved. The 150 days of flooding is perhaps the basis of <em><a href='B:730 9:10'>Rev 9:10</a></em>, where Israel is to have 150 days of tribulation at the hands of her Arab enemies in the last days. The connection between the passages would therefore seem to be teaching that the final 150 days tribulation will be shortened due to the repentance of the remnant.</p><p><em>No flesh would have been saved</em>-</p><p> "Saved" here may mean 'delivered'; it will appear that none of us will survive the tribulation, "but for the elects’ sake those days shall be shortened" and we will be saved by the second coming. Thus <em><a href='B:680 3:12'>2Pe 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 3:15'>2Pe 3:15</a></em> reminds us that by our prayers and spiritual development, the days before the second coming will be shortened. If they were not, even the elect would lose their faith (<em><a href='B:470 24:22'>Mat 24:22</a></em>)- showing how those of us who are alive at Christ's coming will&nbsp;<em>barely</em>&nbsp;survive the spiritual traumas of the last days. The virgins were sleeping when they should have been watching; and Peter says that the righteous in the last generation (see context) will&nbsp;<em>scarcely</em>&nbsp;be saved (<em><a href='B:670 4:18'>1Pe 4:18</a></em>). So it would appear that the days of the final tribulation will be shortened, although in another sense the coming of the Lord is delayed in order to allow our greater spiritual development (<em><a href='B:470 25:5'>Mat 25:5</a></em>). This ‘delay’ is why the harvest will be “over-ripe” for reaping (<em><a href='B:730 14:15'>Rev 14:15</a></em> RV)- or is this a reference to the lack of zeal of preachers to Israel in the last days, not harvesting the ready fruit? The Lord likens the final tribulation to the travail of a woman to bring forth her child. But we read in <em><a href='B:290 66:7-8'>Isa 66:7-8</a></em> in this same context of Israel’s latter day suffering: “Before she travailed, she brought forth: before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child. Who hath heard such a thing?... for as soon as Zion travailed she brought forth her children”. This seems to imply that the expected period of Zion’s travail will be cut short, and she will give spiritual birth far quicker than expected. Perhaps the Lord was alluding to this passage when He spoke of how “the days” of Zion’s labour? shall be shortened.</p><p><em>But for the elect's sake</em>-</p><p> Both the Lord Jesus and Israel are called "the elect" (<em><a href='B:290 42:1'>Isa 42:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 45:4'>Isa 45:4</a></em>); both are fulfilments of the servant songs in Isaiah. <em><a href='B:670 2:4'>1Pe 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 2:6'>1Pe 2:6</a></em> call Jesus “the elect / chosen” and then the same word is used about the believers being an elect / chosen nation (<em><a href='B:670 2:9'>1Pe 2:9</a></em>). The days will be shortened for the elect's sake- and this may refer to either the Lord Jesus, or the believers in Him; the shortening will be for the sake of<em>&nbsp;Christ’s</em>&nbsp;intercession, as well as ours. It’s tempting to understand “the elect” in the Olivet prophecy as referring to the same group- of faithful believers or perhaps specifically Jewish ones who are alive and remain until the Lord’s coming. They are the ones who resist the temptation to be deceived in the very last days (:24) and who are snatched away at the Lord’s coming “from the four winds”, suggesting they are located worldwide (:31). We note that Christ on the cross was called by the same word&nbsp;<em>eklektos</em>-</p><p> “the elect / chosen of God” (<em><a href='B:490 23:35'>Luk 23:35</a></em>). This group will indeed have identified with His crucifixion sufferings. Perhaps this is the group of believers who are also specifically called “the elect” who fight on Mount Zion alongside Jesus against the armies of Israel’s enemies (<em><a href='B:730 17:14'>Rev 17:14</a></em>). In the immediate context, the elect or chosen ones were perhaps intended by the Lord to refer to the listening disciples. <em><a href='B:480 13:20'>Mar 13:20</a></em> labours the point: “For the elect’s sake&nbsp;<em>eklektos</em>, whom He has chosen / elected&nbsp;<em>eklegomai</em>”. The word is specifically used about the Lord’s choosing of the twelve (<em><a href='B:490 6:13'>Luk 6:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 6:70'>Joh 6:70</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 13:18'>Joh 13:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 15:16'>Joh 15:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 15:19'>Joh 15:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 1:2'>Act 1:2</a></em>). He imagined them being scattered to “the four winds” in their obedience to the great commission, but thanks to them, the days would be shortened and they themselves would be gathered to Him at His return. That was the Lord’s hope and ideal intention. It didn’t happen in the first century, and thus has some element of reapplication in a different context in our last days:&nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p><em>Those days shall be shortened</em>– see on <em><a href='B:520 9:28-29'>Rom 9:28-29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 3:9'>2Pe 3:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 9:10'>Rev 9:10</a></em>. This was typified in the Joseph story. "Then Joseph could not refrain himself..." (<em><a href='B:10 45:1'>Gen 45:1</a></em>) implies he planned to drag out the process of spiritually refining his brothers, but his love for them caused him to cut it short. "For the elects sake the days shall be shortened" by Christ (<em><a href='B:470 24:22'>Mat 24:22</a></em>). The same Hebrew word in <em><a href='B:10 45:1'>Gen 45:1</a></em> is used in <em><a href='B:290 42:14'>Isa 42:14</a></em> about how God can no longer refrain Himself in the last days. The RV has: “had been shortened”, suggesting that maybe the Lord had already been in dialogue with the Father and secured a decrease in the Father’s original time period envisaged.</p>


text:
<p>24:23&nbsp;<em>Then if anyone shall say to you</em>-</p><p> This again, spoken to the disciples, suggests that they were the ones who would see these things associated with the return of Christ. But they did not. And in any case, all twelve of them were being addressed, and one of them would turn away from Christ. So there was in any case a conditionality attached to the Lord’s words:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Here is the Christ, or another, Here is the Christ- do not believe them</em>-</p><p> “Lo” AV suggests the actual pointing out of a person. “Here… or there” AV is poor translation, because the same original word is behind both “here” and “there”. The impression is given of people pointing out actual individuals and claiming that ‘This is Christ’. The faithful are to flee once the sign is obvious that Christ is about to be revealed, and in those days and they may literally be days or hours the world will know that Christ’s return is imminent, and therefore all manner of charlatans will start claiming ‘It’s me’. The relatively few claims to be Jesus Christ which are made today are hardly credible, no temptation at all for the faithful, and nearly always the person making the claim is mentally ill. But the Olivet prophecy suggests that these claims by false Christs will be so credible that even the faithful will be sorely tempted to believe them. The risk of deception would be so great that the Lord repeatedly warned against it. If there is some worldwide sign that Christ is about to return, perhaps literally in the sky, as “the sign of the Son of Man in Heaven”, then in those days, such claimants will have far more credibility. It could be that one claimant is particularly persuasive, leading to the final show down on Mount Zion between the true Christ and the anti-Christ, the fake duplicate of Christ.</p>


text:
<p>24:24&nbsp;<em>For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, which shall show great signs and wonders</em>-</p><p> The Lord is virtually quoting the words of Moses in <em><a href='B:50 13:1'>Deu 13:1</a></em>: “When Heb:; AV “if” there arise among you a false prophet… and gives you a sign or wonder”. Even if signs are given, they are not to be believed; apparent miracles are no proof that a man is of God. The Lord is here asserting Himself as the new Moses. The appearance of miraculous “signs” was important in Judaism in order to identify Messiah- hence they asked the Lord to produce such signs (<em><a href='B:470 12:38'>Mat 12:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 16:1'>Mat 16:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 2:18'>Joh 2:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 4:48'>Joh 4:48</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 6:30'>Joh 6:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 1:22'>1Co 1:22</a></em> “the Jews require a sign”). The Lord had refused to respond, even though He had done many miracles. He said that “no sign” would be given to that generation apart from that of Jonah- i:e:, His resurrection. It was “a wicked and adulterous generation that seeks after a sign” (<em><a href='B:470 16:4'>Mat 16:4</a></em>). The disciples likewise assumed that there was to be such a “sign” predicting the Lord’s coming (<em><a href='B:470 24:3'>Mat 24:3</a></em>). On one level it could be argued that the Lord’s answer is actually a refusal to give them such a miraculous “sign” from Him; rather did He give them descriptions of what would happen in the world. He had said the same, in essence, to the Jews when they demanded such a miraculous “sign” of Him; He said they would be given no such sign, but rather they were to discern the “signs s:w. of the times” (<em><a href='B:470 16:3-4'>Mat 16:3-4</a></em>). And this effectively is how He answers the disciples when at the beginning of the Olivet prophecy they likewise ask for a “sign”. He responds by giving them a list of “signs of the times”. However, it would seem from :30 that there will in fact be the “sign” of Messiah visible in the sky- but only in the very last few? days before the forcible establishment of His Kingdom. This will be in opposition to the “signs’ shown by the false prophets. More detail is given in <em><a href='B:730 13:13-14'>Rev 13:13-14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 16:14'>Rev 16:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 19:20'>Rev 19:20</a></em> where we read of the beast system and false prophet doing signs by which they deceived the people in the earth / land. This is an expansion upon the Lord’s warning against being deceived by such signs. And the same scenario is found in <em><a href='B:600 2:9'>2Th 2:9</a></em>, where we find the man of sin sitting in the latter day temple doing “signs and lying wonders” (same words as here in <em><a href='B:470 24:24'>Mat 24:24</a></em>), to be destroyed in the final conflict with the real Christ.</p><p>There is ample evidence that in the lead up to the Babylonian invasion which typifies that of the last days, Jeremiah had to work amid considerable opposition from false prophets who mocked his prophecies of impending Arab victory and the need to repent; they will have their counterparts among the ranks of modern Judaism in the last days (<em><a href='B:310 2:14'>Lam 2:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 20:6'>Jer 20:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 28:1-9'>Jer 28:1-9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 29:24-26'>Jer 29:24-26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 13:2-5'>Zec 13:2-5</a></em>). Perhaps it is such false prophets within Israel which our Lord spoke of in <em><a href='B:470 24:24'>Mat 24:24</a></em>:&nbsp;But there’s no need to speculate too much- when these things come to pass, it will be crystal clear to those aware of the prophecy that we’ve now reached that stage. In the A:D:70 possibility of fulfilment, these people operated under the umbrella of fundamentalist Judaism, as they will in the last days:&nbsp;Their false bearing of the Lord's name (<em><a href='B:470 24:5'>Mat 24:5</a></em>) alludes back to the pseudo-prophets of Jeremiah's time doing the same (<em><a href='B:300 14:14'>Jer 14:14</a></em>):&nbsp;Zedekiah's trauma of being torn between wanting to accept the words of the false prophets whilst inwardly knowing the truth of Jeremiah's words, will perhaps be repeated in the leadership of latter-day Israel, to whom the Elijah ministry will teach the true word of God:&nbsp;&nbsp; The apparent mimicry of Jeremiah's style by the false prophets will perhaps be seen in the last days too.</p><p><em>So as to lead astray- if possible</em>-</p><p><em>even the elect-</em></p><p>&nbsp;The possibility of deception may be precluded by the fact that the elect, by reason of being the elect, will not be deceived. But there may also be the suggestion that it is impossible to deceive the elect because they are preserved from such deception. The Father and Son are willing and able to “keep you from falling” by sealing or preserving the faithful from such deception. The element of God’s work over and above human freewill effort is itself indicated by the very term “the elect”; those chosen, by God and not of themselves.</p><p>A major theme of the prophecy is the danger of being deceived (:4,5,11). As observed under :23&nbsp;<em>Look, here is the Christ or here</em>, the need for this urgent warning requires that the claimants have far more credibility than such persons have today.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:25'>Mat 24:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Listen, I have told you beforehand</em>-</p><p> The intention of prophecy is that when it is fulfilled, then all is clear to the believers and they are thereby guided and strengthened. This will be particularly true in those last few days when the sign of the Son of Man is in the sky (:30), everyone somehow knows Christ is about to come- and inevitably false claimants will arise, perhaps one particular one will claim to be Christ and will go to battle against the real Christ. Hence the repetition of the Lord’s warning about not being deceived by this person or related claims.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:26'>Mat 24:26</a></em><em>&nbsp;Therefore, if they shall say to you-&nbsp;</em>This appears to be a laboured repetition of the warning in :23- see notes there. The Lord is really underlining the possibility of deception by false claims to be Him in the very last days of the tribulation. He will not be hidden "in" anything nor anywhere- His coming will be as clear as lightning.</p><p><em>Look, he is in the wilderness Do not go</em>-</p><p> These are the identical Greek words as used about how the people of Jerusalem 'went forth' into the 'desert' to see John the Baptist (<em><a href='B:470 11:7'>Mat 11:7</a></em> "what&nbsp;<em>went you out&nbsp;</em>into the&nbsp;<em>desert</em>&nbsp;to see"; <em><a href='B:470 3:1'>Mat 3:1</a></em>), and how the crowds went out to see the Lord Himself in the "desert place" (<em><a href='B:470 14:13'>Mat 14:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 14:15'>Mat 14:15</a></em>). It will not be a question of going forth to see Jesus, as it had been until recently in the Lord's ministry. Now it will be too late for that- His coming will be evident to all. Yet the Lord has introduced the Olivet prophecy by saying that the house of the temple has been left unto them "desolate", the same word translated "desert" (<em><a href='B:470 23:38'>Mat 23:38</a></em>). He may be saying that any idea that He has appeared lurking around the desolated temple area will likewise be false; He will not be in any "secret chamber" of that temple. This would explain the parallel between "desert" and "secret chamber". Do not "go forth" uses the same word as the Lord goes on to use in :27- His coming will be as the lightning 'goes forth'. They will not go to Him, He will come to them. But He is talking here concerning the unbelievers. The faithful will have already 'fled', and I have suggested that their dropping all things, even their jackets, to respond to that call is nothing less than their response to the news that 'He's back'. The same word translated "go forth" is used in <em><a href='B:470 25:1'>Mat 25:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:6'>Mat 25:6</a></em> about the need to "go forth" and meet Him, and how the unfaithful amongst the ecclesia will delay in response to that call. Again, Revelation provides more detail, using the same word to describe the latter day call to 'go forth out of' Babylon or else they will be destroyed along with her (<em><a href='B:730 18:4'>Rev 18:4</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p><em>Look, he is in the inner chambers Do not believe it</em>-</p><p> Seeing they were sitting near the temple, the reference would contextually have been to the chambers of the temple; see on&nbsp;<em>In the desert</em>.</p>


text:
<p>24:27&nbsp;<em>For as the lightning comes from the east and is seen even to the west</em>-</p><p> This is the "lightning" and earthquake associated with the return of Christ when His people, natural and spiritual, are at the nadir of persecution and tribulation (<em><a href='B:730 4:5'>Rev 4:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 8:5'>Rev 8:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 11:19'>Rev 11:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 16:18'>Rev 16:18</a></em>). Lightning doesn’t do as described here. The reference is therefore to the Old Testament manifestation of lightning as part of the Cherubim, which flashed with lightning (<em><a href='B:330 1:4'>Eze 1:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 1:14'>Eze 1:14</a></em>). Ezekiel saw the Cherubim depart from the temple (24:1 has alluded to this already), go Eastward to the mount of Olives and then mount up to Heaven (<em><a href='B:330 10:19'>Eze 10:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 11:22-23'>Eze 11:22-23</a></em>). This is why “the Glory”, the lightning of the Cherubim chariot, was seen as returning to the Mount of Olives "by the way of the east" into the temple (<em><a href='B:330 43:2-4'>Eze 43:2-4</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p>The Lord had earlier used these very same words in <em><a href='B:490 17:20-24'>Luk 17:20-24</a></em>: "The Kingdom of God comes not with observation it wouldn't be as if a series of signs were fulfilled and people could see the Kingdom of God inching nearer over the decades. Nor shall they say 'Look here' or 'Look there' this is <em><a href='B:470 24:23'>Mat 24:23</a></em> " 'Look here' or 'Look there'". For the Kingdom of God a title of Messiah is amongst you... They shall say to you in the final tribulation, 'See here' or 'See there' this again is <em><a href='B:470 24:23'>Mat 24:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:26'>Mat 24:26</a></em>; go not after them, nor follow them <em><a href='B:470 24:26'>Mat 24:26</a></em> "Go not forth... believe it not". For as the lightning that lightens out of the one part of Heaven and shines unto the other part under Heaven, so shall also the Son of Man be in His day... they shall desire to see one of the days of the Son of Man". The connection would suggest that as the Lord stood amongst them, He was the Son of Man in His day. Those who accepted Him as Messiah were accepting His 'coming' to them. For those who did not, and who argued about whether or not He fulfilled all the prophecies they were analysing "with observation", He would 'come' unmistakably, but in judgment.</p><p><em>So shall the coming of the Son of Man</em>&nbsp;<em>be</em>-</p><p> No more doubt can be allowed that the&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;is visible and not invisible. The Lord is here specifically warning against any idea that His&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;is somehow invisible. Jehovah's pseudo-Witnesses and preterists need to take this far more seriously. The point must be driven home that&nbsp;<em>parousia&nbsp;</em>always&nbsp;refers to the physical presence of a person:&nbsp;&nbsp; There is another Greek word frequently translated 'coming' which is more flexible in meaning, but&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;means 'a literal being alongside', and is always used in that way:--</p><p>&nbsp; "As the lightning cometh out of the east... so shall also the&nbsp;<em>coming</em>&nbsp;(<em>parousia</em>) of the son of man be” (<em><a href='B:470 24:27'>Mat 24:27</a></em>).-</p><p>&nbsp; "The day that Noe entered into the ark... the flood came... so shall also the coming of the son of man be" (:38,39).</p>


text:
<p>24:28&nbsp;<em>Wherever the carcase is</em>-</p><p> This whole verse has various possible interpretations which each seem to me to have things to commend them and yet also their own problems. The key word is "For". This verse is an expansion upon the Lord's teaching that His coming will be visible, will be as the lightning of judgment upon those who have not "gone forth" to Him, and no credence should be given to any claims He has come invisibly. The Lord may be likening His coming to the coming down from the sky of eagles upon the carcase- of Israel. This could have had an AD70 fulfilment in the 'eagles' of the Roman legions, just as Yahweh's Old Testament 'comings' in judgment upon Israel were at the hands of the Babylonian and Assyrian armies. But the final coming of Divine judgment will be in the literal, personal coming of God's Son to earth in judgment. The same Greek word translated "where" is found in <em><a href='B:480 13:14'>Mar 13:14</a></em> - the abomination of desolation will stand "<em>where</em>&nbsp;it ought not". It could be that this location on the temple mount is what the Lord has in view. This is where He will come down in judgment. Upon the very location He was then standing upon with the disciples, the pride and glory of an apostate Judaism. It was already no more than a carcase in God's eyes. The temple was "where s:w. the Jews always resort" (<em><a href='B:500 18:20'>Joh 18:20</a></em>). The carcase or dead body may not necessarily refer to Israel. If we take <em><a href='B:730 11:8-9'>Rev 11:8-9</a></em> as an expansion of the Olivet prophecy, we find the same Greek word used about the dead bodies of the faithful remnant who share their Lord's death in Jerusalem and lay exposed for three days- perhaps literal days. The metaphor of the eagles coming speaks of&nbsp;Divine judgment from Heaven, ultimately in the personal coming of Christ to earth. In this case, the eagles would come because of the dead bodies / carcase of those who had died the death of Christ in Jerusalem in the final tribulation. The Greek word for "carcase",&nbsp;<em>ptoma</em>, literally means 'a fallen one', and is from the verb&nbsp;<em>pipto</em>, to fall. And this word is used about the fall of Jerusalem- also in Revelation 11. The city "fell" (<em><a href='B:730 11:13'>Rev 11:13</a></em>), just as Jerusalem was to "fall by the edge of the sword" (<em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em>).</p><p>It’s possible that the Lord intended us to understand the carcase as Jerusalem, and the vultures as the latter day invaders of Israel (<em><a href='B:300 4:13'>Jer 4:13</a></em>):&nbsp; Or it has been suggested by Harry Whittaker that “If you (my disciples) show yourselves to be spiritually a carcase (as in <em><a href='B:730 3:1'>Rev 3:1</a></em>), you will certainly find yourselves the prey of these "vultures," the false teachers”. The question is similar to that in <em><a href='B:490 17:37'>Luk 17:37</a></em>, where this is said is in answer to the question: "Where, Lord?”. This may not necessarily mean ‘<em>to&nbsp;</em>where’. That the Roman invasion of AD67-70 was a detailed fulfilment of some parts of the Mosaic prophecies of curses for disobedience is well known and chronicled:&nbsp; Our Lord's quotation of <em><a href='B:50 28:26'>Deu 28:26</a></em> in here in :28 ("your carcases shall be meat unto the fowls of the air") is confirmation of this.</p><p><em>There will the eagles gather together</em>-</p><p> I suggested under&nbsp;<em>For where the carcase is&nbsp;</em>that this may refer to the coming of Christ down from Heaven in judgment upon either the carcase of Israel, or for the sake of the carcases of the slain believers. The Greek for "eagle",&nbsp;<em>aetos</em>, literally means 'one of the air&nbsp;<em>aer</em>', and&nbsp;<em>aer</em>&nbsp;is used of how the Lord Jesus will come in the "air"&nbsp;<em>aer</em>&nbsp;with the faithful in judgment (<em><a href='B:590 4:17'>1Th 4:17</a></em> - note that this part of 1 Thessalonians is full of allusion to the Olivet prophecy). This would be the pouring out of the seventh vial into "the air"&nbsp;<em>aer</em>, when finally "It is done" (<em><a href='B:730 16:17'>Rev 16:17</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p>The Lord's usage of similar language in <em><a href='B:490 17:37'>Luk 17:37</a></em> must, however, be given its due weight. There the Lord speaks of the gathering of the eagles in terms of explaining how His people will be gathered to Him and judgment. The same word for 'gather' is used repeatedly for the gathering of the faithful in the last days (<em><a href='B:470 3:12'>Mat 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 13:30'>Mat 13:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:26'>Mat 25:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:32'>Mat 25:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 15:6'>Joh 15:6</a></em>). Most notably, we find it used in <em><a href='B:590 4:14'>1Th 4:14</a></em>, comforting the believers that God will at the last day 'gather' the dead believers at the last day (AV "will God&nbsp;<em>bring</em>&nbsp;with Him"). This will be the "gathering together unto Him" (<em><a href='B:600 2:1'>2Th 2:1</a></em> s:w:). This is all impressive evidence that the language of 'gathering' is used about the gathering of the believers to Christ at His coming, and according to <em><a href='B:590 4:16-17'>1Th 4:16-17</a></em> this will involve a literal being snatched away from persecution, according to the Olivet prophecy. Just as the believers will be led / gathered to human judgment seats (<em><a href='B:480 13:11'>Mar 13:11</a></em>,&nbsp;<em>ago</em>), gathered / lead / brought&nbsp;<em>ago</em>&nbsp;before human kings (<em><a href='B:490 21:12'>Luk 21:12</a></em>), so they will be gathered to the judgment seat of Christ the King&nbsp;<em>sun-ago</em>:&nbsp;</p><p>The Lord responds to the question about how we will get to judgment by saying that eagles fly to where the body Is. It’s possible to interpret eagles as Angels- e.g. <em><a href='B:730 8:13'>Rev 8:13</a></em> speaks of an Angel flying through the sky in the last day, crying ‘woe’- the Greek&nbsp;<em>ouai</em>&nbsp;would’ve been understood as an imitation of the noise an eagle makes. And there are other links between Revelation 8 and Matthew 24. So perhaps the Lord’s answer was that we are not to worry about getting there, as our Angels will take us to judgment. <em><a href='B:450 14:5'>Zec 14:5</a></em> speaks of the coming of the Lord Jesus “and all the holy ones with him”. But it is applied to the believers in <em><a href='B:590 3:13'>1Th 3:13</a></em> and to the Angels in <em><a href='B:600 1:7'>2Th 1:7</a></em>. In this sense, the believers come with their Angels to judgment; but because the process happens in a moment of time, it appears that in fact Jesus returns with the faithful. This is why elsewhere the Lord Jesus is described as returning both with Angels (<em><a href='B:470 16:27'>Mat 16:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:31'>Mat 25:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 9:26'>Luk 9:26</a></em>) and with the saints (<em><a href='B:730 19:14'>Rev 19:14</a></em> cp. 17:14).</p><p>One of the well known shames of crucifixion was that the body was pecked by birds, even before death occurred. The idea of an uncovered body attracting birds (i:e. the believers) would have been readily understood as a crucifixion allusion. Whilst this may seem an inappropriate symbol, it wouldn’t be the only time the Bible uses language which we may deem unfitting. Consider how <em><a href='B:230 78:65-66'>Psa 78:65-66</a></em> likens God to a drunk man awakening and flailing out at His enemies, striking them in the private parts. I always have to adjust my specs and read this again before I can really accept that this is what it says. So in <em><a href='B:470 24:28'>Mat 24:28</a></em>, the Lord seems to be responding to the disciples’ query about the physicalities of the future judgment by saying that in reality, His crucifixion would in essence be their judgment, and this is what they should rather concern themselves with. They would gather together unto it and through this know the verdict upon them, all quite naturally, as eagles are gathered by natural instinct to the carcass. The thief on the cross wanted the Lord to remember him for good at judgment day. Yet He replied that He could tell him today, right now, the result of the judgment- the thief would be accepted. It’s as if the Lord even in that agony of mind and body… realized keenly that He, there, that fateful afternoon, was sitting in essence on the judgment throne. And for us too, the Lord on Calvary is our constant and insistent judge. It could even be that when the Lord told the Sanhedrin that they would see the son of man coming in judgment (<em><a href='B:480 14:62'>Mar 14:62</a></em>), He was referring to the cross. For how will they exactly see Him coming in judgment at the last day?</p>


text:
<p>24:29&nbsp;<em>But immediately after the tribulation of those days</em>-</p><p> The phrase&nbsp;<em>eutheos meta&nbsp;</em>doesn’t necessarily have to mean ‘and then, after that’, in a chronological sense (although it can mean that). It could refer to things going on at the same time,&nbsp;<em>meta&nbsp;</em>the tribulation. The tribulation is that spoken of in :21 “Then shall be great tribulation”. Verses 22-28 are therefore a parenthesis, developing the theme that false Christs shall appear, but we should not be taken in by them because the Lord’s coming will be literally visible and crystal clear to all. The “tribulation” will be “immediately” followed by the Lord’s return. Yet the “tribulation” of :21 was clearly initially relevant to the destruction of the temple in AD70. There was a rescheduling of the Divine program, just as has happened so often in prophetic history, not least in the promised restoration of the Kingdom not happening after the 70 years in Babylon.</p><p>“The tribulation” is explained in Luke’s record as being Jerusalem being “trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled” (<em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em>). After this, in Luke’s record, there are the signs in sun, moon and stars which Matthew’s record also describes- as coming “immediately&nbsp;<em>meta</em>&nbsp;the tribulation”. The "times of the Gentiles" (<em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em>) appear to refer to the time of Gentile domination of Jerusalem, and yet it is reapplied to refer to the time of Gentile opportunity to learn the Gospel, according to how Paul alludes to it in <em><a href='B:520 11:25'>Rom 11:25</a></em>. And yet the application to Jerusalem’s tribulation may remain true ultimately, in the very last days. For the allusion is to <em><a href='B:450 12:3'>Zec 12:3</a></em>:"In that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people (i:e. all around Israel, as this often means):&nbsp; all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it". The Septuagint renders the first phrase as "a stone trodden down by the Gentiles", clearly alluded to by Jesus in His description of Jerusalem being captured by the Gentiles (<em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em>):&nbsp;&nbsp; Those who are 'gathered together' against Jerusalem must be the Arabs, according to the Zechariah context. The rejected likewise will be burdened with a heavy stone (<em><a href='B:470 18:6'>Mat 18:6</a></em>), showing that they will share the judgments of Israel's enemies. It may well be that the "all" which will be fulfilled in <em><a href='B:490 21:32'>Luk 21:32</a></em> is to be equated with "the times of the Gentiles" being fulfilled (<em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em>). "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles" for three and a half years, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. 'Jebus', the old name for Jerusalem, means 'downtrodden'. This&nbsp;hints that the liberation of Jebus at the beginning of David's reign was seen by Christ as typical of the time when He would liberate Jerusalem from downtreading, at his return. This suggests that the times of Gentile domination of Jerusalem are to be ended by the establishment of the Kingdom at Christ's second coming; we are yet to see, therefore, a Gentile domination of Jerusalem before Christ's coming.</p><p>The Lord predicted that the final tribulation- which He says is that prophesied in Daniel- would be followed “immediately” by His return. The evil man who places the desolating abomination meets his end in war (<em><a href='B:340 11:45'>Dan 11:45</a></em>)- just as the same individual does in <em><a href='B:340 8:23'>Dan 8:23</a></em>. And this leads in to the resurrection and judgment at the Lord’s return (<em><a href='B:340 12:1-2'>Dan 12:1-2</a></em>). So the Lord’s own interpretation of Daniel 11 leaves us with no doubt that the whole section about the abomination and the individual responsible for it applies to our last days. Any partial fulfilment it may have had in Antiochus Epiphanes, Nero or Titus only makes those men prototypes of the final abuser yet to come:&nbsp;</p><p>It is at this time,&nbsp;<em>after</em>&nbsp;the fall of Jerusalem, that we read of “the sea and the waves roaring” (<em><a href='B:490 21:25'>Luk 21:25</a></em>). There are many prophecies in Jeremiah and Ezekiel of Babylon being at war with the Arab nations who supported her in the attack on Jerusalem, e.g. concerning Ammon (<em><a href='B:330 21:20'>Eze 21:20</a></em>) and Tyre (<em><a href='B:330 26:7'>Eze 26:7</a></em>):&nbsp;Ammon is mentioned as&nbsp;<em>escaping&nbsp;</em>out of the hand of the king of the North during his invasion of Israel and Jerusalem (<em><a href='B:340 11:41'>Dan 11:41</a></em>):&nbsp; This shows that there will be much inter-semitic conflict both before and during Israel's prolonged desolation period. "The sea and the waves roaring" at the time of Israel's final suffering (<em><a href='B:490 21:25'>Luk 21:25</a></em>) is a figure taken from <em><a href='B:300 49:23'>Jer 49:23</a></em> concerning the nations around Israel being like the troubled sea in their fighting with each other. However, the outstanding conflicts will be temporarily forgotten in the last days to concentrate on a combined push against Jerusalem:&nbsp;But once this is captured, the old rivalries will suddenly violently surface, which is how God will destroy the invaders and save the righteous remnant who are still barely alive in the sewers and basements of Jerusalem. It seems that the beasts of Daniel 7 are only different aspects of the one great beast which finally emerges. Daniel sees them all come up together after the waves of the sea are troubled (<em><a href='B:340 7:3'>Dan 7:3</a></em>), connecting with the Lord's description of the last day powers around Israel in the same way (<em><a href='B:490 21:25'>Luk 21:25</a></em>).</p><p><em>The sun shall be darkened</em>-</p><p> After the tribulation, as it was when Jesus died (<em><a href='B:490 23:45'>Luk 23:45</a></em> s:w:). Israel’s tribulation will make them understand what He went through. The context has been the Lord’s insistence that His coming will be obviously visible, like lightening in the sky, and the reference to “the sign of the Son of Man in Heaven” / the sky (:30) would suggest that a literal sign in the sky is what the Lord has in mind. The allusion to the crucifixion would also require a literal element of fulfilment. The additional information given in <em><a href='B:730 8:12'>Rev 8:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 9:2'>Rev 9:2</a></em> suggests that this darkening of sun and stars happens progressively, although that may be over a period of only a few literal days. There are reports of such signs being seen over Jerusalem in the lead up to AD70, the appearance of comets etc. However it seems to me that Josephus had access to the Olivet prophecy and some of the wording of his historical claims is so similar to the Lord’s words that I personally doubt the degree of real fulfilment that was going on; rather do I suspect he was consciously alluding to the Lord’s words and wishing to see them fulfilled in the history he was recording. That is not the same thing as AD70 actually fulfilling in detail the Olivet prophecy.</p><p><em>The sun shall be darkened and the moon shall not give her light</em>-</p><p> Joseph's dream clearly identifies these symbols as representing Israel. The passages which make this same identification are many: <em><a href='B:10 37:9-10'>Gen 37:9-10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 15:5'>Gen 15:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 22:17'>Gen 22:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:370 8:8-10'>Amo 8:8-10</a></em>;&nbsp; <em><a href='B:400 3:6'>Mic 3:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:260 6:10'>Son 6:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 24:23'>Isa 24:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 33:20-26'>Jer 33:20-26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 2:10'>Joe 2:10</a></em>, <em><a href='B:360 2:30-32'>Joe 2:30-32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 3:15'>Joe 3:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 2:20'>Act 2:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 6:12'>Rev 6:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 8:12'>Rev 8:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 12:1'>Rev 12:1</a></em>. <em><a href='B:300 31:35-36'>Jer 31:35-36</a></em> is likely the Old Testament passage the Lord specifically had in mind: "Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divides the sea when the waves thereof roar; the Lord of hosts is his name. If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever". Only here do we find "sun, moon, and stars" combined with "sea and waves roaring" as in the Olivet prophecy in Luke 21:&nbsp; In Luke He spoke of "On the earth distress of&nbsp;<em>nations&nbsp;</em>(Gentile nations causing distress in the earth / land of Israel) with perplexity… men's hearts failing them for fear and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth (or land, of Israel)”. The Greek word translated "perplexity" is used in the LXX concerning the final tribulation of Israel (<em><a href='B:30 26:16'>Lev 26:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 28:22'>Deu 28:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 5:30'>Isa 5:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 8:20'>Isa 8:20</a></em> LXX):&nbsp;</p><p>"Immediately after the tribulation... shall all the tribes of the earth (land- of Israel) mourn, and then shall they see the Son of Man coming" (:29,30) is followed immediately by the fig tree parable. The chronology seems clear- a tribulation, repentance of Israel (note the allusions to the mourning of Zechariah 12, 13), and then the second coming, with the fig tree parable about the repentance of Israel added as a footnote to this part of the prophecy.</p><p><em>And the stars shall fall from heaven and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken</em>-</p><p> The Greek phrase is used only elsewhere in <em><a href='B:730 6:13'>Rev 6:13</a></em>. This vision is clearly an expansion upon the Olivet prophecy. There, the stars fall “as a fig tree casts her unripe figs”. This too is the language of the Olivet prophecy (24:32). The lack of spiritual maturity in Israel is related to the stars of Israel- see on&nbsp;<em>Sun... moon... stars</em>&nbsp;falling. The appearance of comets would certainly give the impression of falling stars, and I suggest that the main fulfilment will be in terms of things visibly seen in the sky, as hard proof to all the world that the Lord Jesus is returning.</p><p>The events of judgment day will be a ‘shaking’ of the world, including the faithful (<em><a href='B:490 6:48'>Luk 6:48</a></em> the house built on the rock could not be “shaken”, s:w:). <em><a href='B:650 12:26-27'>Heb 12:26-27</a></em> surely allude here, saying that just as the earth shook when the old covenant was instituted, so the “heavens” would also be shaken. The suggestion of the context is that this day of shaking both heaven and earth was almost upon the readership- who were Hebrews, Jewish Christians.</p>


text:
<p>24:30&nbsp;<em>And then the sign of the Son of Man shall appear in heaven</em>-</p><p> Matthew began his Gospel with the same word and idea, speaking of the 'appearance' of the star which heralded the coming of the Son of Man (2:7). The Lord has just used the same word in speaking of how His coming would be as the lightning shines or appears in the sky (:27). This, along with the allusion to the star seen by the wise men, encourage us to think of this final "sign of the Son of Man" as a literal appearance in the sky, strengthening our suggestion that the signs in the sun, moon and stars in :29 are likewise to be interpreted literally. <em><a href='B:500 1:5'>Joh 1:5</a></em> perhaps puts all this in more spiritual terms by likening the Lord to a light shining s:w. "appear" in Jewish darkness, unperceived. Now is the day to perceive Him as He is, rather than too late at His return. These signs of the Lord's return will be in the sky for the world; the faithful will have already dropped all and fled, to Him, knowing He has come. How they will be called to go forth to meet Him isn't altogether clear, although <em><a href='B:680 1:19'>2Pe 1:19</a></em> uses the same word translated "appear" in speaking of how when the day of His coming dawns, i:e. begins, the day star will arise shining brightly in our hearts:&nbsp;</p><p>As noted earlier, it was exactly such a visible sign that the disciples and the Jews wanted in order to know Jesus was Messiah and that He had returned (see on :23). The Lord had explained at least twice that no such sign would be given. But now He is saying that all too late, such a sign would be given. For now, we are to believe without such signs written up in the sky. If "the sign of the son of man" which appears over Israel and leads the tribes of Israel to mourn in repentance is a literal vision of the Angel-cherubim, then this has a basis in Jacob seeing the Angelic vision in the time of his distress.</p><p><em>Then all the tribes of the earth</em>-</p><p> "Tribes",&nbsp;<em>phule</em>, is used exclusively of the tribes of Israel, until the references in Revelation to people of all nations, tribes and languages having representatives who were redeemed, being under the power of the beast etc. Even those references could be understood as referring to the tribes of Israel, along with the nations of the Gentile world. But "the earth" often refers to the land, of Israel. And the idea of tribes mourning is clearly referring to the prophecy of <em><a href='B:450 12:10-14'>Zec 12:10-14</a></em> that the tribes of Israel will mourn when they see the once crucified Christ, still with the marks in His body testifying to His crucifixion. <em><a href='B:730 1:7'>Rev 1:7</a></em> uses the same language. Israel will finally all repent when they see the sign of the Son of Man- and then, He will return literally and visibly in the clouds. The call of John the Baptist and the Lord's own preachers had been for Israel to "mourn" in repentance (<em><a href='B:470 11:17'>Mat 11:17</a></em>). This they had not done as intended, but they shall do so at His actual return. They who had laughed in this life will mourn then in rejection (<em><a href='B:490 6:25'>Luk 6:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 4:9'>Jas 4:9</a></em>); their repentance will be too late. Another possibility is that the impenitent amongst Israel will die in the final tribulation as outlined in Zechariah 14, and these who mourn are those who repent and are accepted; for <em><a href='B:450 12:14'>Zec 12:14</a></em> adds the detail that the tribes who mourn will be those "that remain", who are so the Hebrew means 'the remnant'. But see below on&nbsp;<em>They shall see:&nbsp;</em>&nbsp;</p><p><em>Shall mourn, and they shall see</em>-</p><p> A play on words in the Greek:&nbsp;<em>kopsontai... opsontai</em>&nbsp;. The intention of this paronomasia is that Israel’s repentant mourning is directly related to their seeing Him in the sense that His visible return only happens once they repent. When “all the tribes of the earth / land mourn in repentance… then shall they see the Son of man coming”. Some in Israel must repent before Christ returns. The Lord refers to this in speaking to the Jews who crucified Him: "You shall see s:w. the Son of Man... coming in the clouds of Heaven" (<em><a href='B:470 26:64'>Mat 26:64</a></em>). They would see that all too late, as part of the process of their condemnation- to realize it was all true, and it is too late to do anything about it. This is why the pronouns change from “they” here to “you” when talking again to the faithful disciples in :33. The Lord had earlier used the same idea, in saying that that group would only "see" Him again when they said "Blessed is He that comes in the name of the Lord" (<em><a href='B:490 13:35'>Luk 13:35</a></em>). They would see that and say that all too late. The Lord's words clearly suggest they of that generation would see His return in glory. But His coming was delayed, and they did not. But they will at the last day, for they will be resurrected to face judgment and condemnation. The chronological issues need not worry us too much- i:e. when will they be resurrected, at precisely what point on the timeline of these events. The meaning of time will surely be collapsed around the Lord's return. This will be the final fulfilment of the prophecy that they shall look upon Him whom they pierced and mourn (<em><a href='B:730 1:7'>Rev 1:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 19:37'>Joh 19:37</a></em>; "look" is s:w. "see" here in <em><a href='B:470 24:30'>Mat 24:30</a></em>). The invitation of course is to look upon the crucified Christ now and mourn in repentance; for we shall have to do this one way or the other, either now in repentance, or too late in condemnation.</p><p>The foolish virgins want to go to buy oil; they make a foolish excuse, seeing the shops were evidently shut. These are those who mourn and wail when they see the sign of the Son of Man (<em><a href='B:470 24:30-31'>Mat 24:30-31</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:730 1:7'>Rev 1:7</a></em>). They want to hide from Him, as Adam and the rejected of <em><a href='B:730 6:16'>Rev 6:16</a></em>. Then they compose themselves and go to meet Him, persuading themselves that they will be accepted by Him (because later they are surprised).</p><p><em>The Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven</em>&nbsp;- <em><a href='B:340 7:14'>Dan 7:14</a></em>. The language of clouds and then Angels (:31) is reminiscent of the Lord’s ascension, at which the Angels promised His return “in like manner”; and the same language is used of His return in <em><a href='B:510 1:7'>Act 1:7</a></em>. This precludes any invisible ‘coming’ in AD70. Rather than thinking that the Lord somehow ‘came’ in AD70 in some metaphorical manner, I would suggest that the literal language is such that we can only conclude that His literal return has been delayed. Otherwise we end up forcing the obviously literal into the metaphorical.</p><p>The moment of the second coming (:27&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>) is likened to a flash of lightning and the beginning of rain at the time of Noah's flood:&nbsp;&nbsp; This makes any application of&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;to the prolonged series of events in A:D. 69/70 at least tenuous when compared to the obvious application to the moment of the second coming:&nbsp;&nbsp; There are many links between Matthew 24, 25 and 1 Thessalonians 4, 5 which have been tabulated by several expositors. According to these connections, the Lord's 'parousia' mentioned in Matthew 24 is interpreted by Paul as referring to the literal second coming (<em><a href='B:470 24:30-31'>Mat 24:30-31</a></em> = <em><a href='B:590 4:15-16'>1Th 4:15-16</a></em>). In view of all this, it is desirable to interpret the 'coming' of the Lord in Matthew 24 as referring to the literal presence of Christ at His return, although this is not to rule out any primary reference to the events of A:D. 70:&nbsp;Indeed I would argue that since&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;means a literal presence, it’s not the case that the prophecy received a primary fulfilment in AD70; rather is it that the literal return of Christ was intended then, but was rescheduled. At best, the&nbsp;<em>parousia</em>&nbsp;element of the predictions had no partial fulfilment in AD70. The flow of the prophecy is indicated by the repetition of words like "then" : "<em>Then</em>&nbsp;shall they deliver you up…&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;shall many be offended…&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;shall the end come…&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;let them which be in Judea…&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;shall be great tribulation…&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;if any man shall say unto you, Here is Christ…&nbsp;<em>immediately after the tribulation of those days</em>&nbsp;("in<em>&nbsp;those days</em>, after that tribulation", <em><a href='B:480 13:24'>Mar 13:24</a></em>)…&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;shall appear the sign of the Son of man…&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the son of man coming" (Matthew 24). There is no suggestion here of any break in application, from AD70 to the last days. If the reference to Christ coming in glory with the Angels is accepted as referring to the last days, but the earlier verses of the prophecy to AD70 alone, we have to find the point where Christ breaks from AD70 to the last days. And I would suggest such a point cannot be found.</p><p><em>"</em>In the clouds" clearly alludes to His ascension in clouds, and the promise that He would return "in like manner" (<em><a href='B:510 1:11'>Act 1:11</a></em>), presumably meaning in clouds to the same Mount of Olives. Again we are invited to understand these as literal clouds, just as the signs in the heavenly bodies of :29 are likewise to be understood. At His coming, the figurative will pass away and planet earth and those who dwell upon it will be faced with the ultimate reality- the personal, literal coming of God's Son to earth.</p><p><em>With power and great glory</em>-</p><p> The very words used by the Lord in the model prayer of <em><a href='B:470 6:13'>Mat 6:13</a></em> concerning the power and glory of the Kingdom of God. The coming of the Lord to establish the Kingdom is clearly yet future and did not occur in AD70. This is the time when “the Son of Man shall come in the glory s:w. of His Father with His angels, and then shall He repay every man according to his deeds” (<em><a href='B:470 16:27'>Mat 16:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:31'>Mat 25:31</a></em>). Likewise, this is “the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of his glory s:w:, and you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (<em><a href='B:470 19:28'>Mat 19:28</a></em>). Such a judgment and coming with Angels never occurred in AD70. John’s equivalent of this is to emphasize that in essence, the believers behold Christ’s glory now, insofar as they perceive the wonder and moral pinnacle of His achievement for us on the cross (<em><a href='B:500 17:24'>Joh 17:24</a></em>). <em><a href='B:580 3:4'>Col 3:4</a></em> teaches that “When Christ who is our life i:e. our basis of resurrection shall appear, then shall we also appear with Him in glory”. His coming in glory will be ours, in that we will have been snatched away to meet with Him and will come with Him to Zion. And yet the next verse speaks as if now, at this point, the Angels are sent to gather the elect. But these chronological discrepancies are no real issue for the believer if we accept that the meaning of time must be changed around the time of Christ’s coming, as must the meaning of space if Einstein’s theory of relativity is correct. This would explain all practical concerns about space and time issues relating to the day of judgment. Another window on the apparent chronological discrepancies is the consideration that there are various possible potential scenarios, which will work out according to the speed and nature of the spiritual response of both natural and spiritual Israel.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:31'>Mat 24:31</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And he shall send forth his angels</em>-</p><p> The preachers of His Gospel are His messengers / ‘angels’ reaping in the harvest and proclaiming God’s victory. And yet these are the very things which the Angels are described as doing in the last day (<em><a href='B:480 13:27'>Mar 13:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 14:6-14'>Rev 14:6-14</a></em>). Yet we are doing it right now. In the preaching of the Gospel, we are sharing with the Angels in their work. We’re in tandem with them. The nature of our response to the Gospel when we hear it in this life is essentially our response to the call to judgment at the last day. The very same Greek words translated “Send… Angels” are to be found in the description of John the Baptist being sent to gather men to the Lord Jesus: “I send My messenger before Your face” (<em><a href='B:470 11:10'>Mat 11:10</a></em>). The idea is clearly that those who had responded to John’s message of repentance and faith in Christ’s forgiveness have in essence already been gathered for the Kingdom. And yet Israel generally had stoned those sent s:w. unto them (<em><a href='B:470 23:37'>Mat 23:37</a></em> - the Lord said this introducing the Olivet prophecy).</p><p><em>With a great sound of a trumpet</em>-</p><p> The trumpet associated with the Lord’s second coming in <em><a href='B:730 11:15'>Rev 11:15</a></em>? The trumpet associated with our change to immortality in <em><a href='B:530 15:52'>1Co 15:52</a></em>, “the trump of God” associated with the resurrection and gathering in <em><a href='B:590 4:16'>1Th 4:16</a></em>.</p><p><em>And they shall gather together his elect</em>-</p><p> Alluded to in <em><a href='B:600 2:1'>2Th 2:1</a></em> "our gathering together unto Him". However, a case can be made that the believers are already with Christ when He comes in the clouds. Therefore the “elect” could possibly refer specifically to natural Israel rather than the believers. If the reference is to the believers, this creates a chronological issue- although see on <em><a href='B:470 24:30'>Mat 24:30</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Power and great glory</em>. The Angels will be sent out to gather together the elect, but Angels will also be ‘sent forth’ to “gather out of His Kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity” (<em><a href='B:470 13:41'>Mat 13:41</a></em>). It seems that this ‘gathering out’ will be achieved by the more positive ‘gathering together’ of the faithful. The point of gathering is the point of division between good and bad; our response to the certain news that ‘He’s back’ will decide the outcome of our judgment. Those wise virgins who go forth to meet Christ immediately are therefore those who will be "caught up together" with the faithful believers who will have been resurrected. Just as eagles mount up into the air and come down where the carcass is, so we will come to judgment. This will be when the Angels "gather together&nbsp;<em>his elect</em>" (<em><a href='B:470 24:31'>Mat 24:31</a></em>). They then "meet the Lord in the air" literally, perhaps connecting with <em><a href='B:730 11:12'>Rev 11:12</a></em>:&nbsp; "They (the faithful, persecuted saints of the last days) heard a great voice from heaven (cp. "the voice" of <em><a href='B:590 4:16'>1Th 4:16</a></em>) saying unto them, Come up (cp. "caught up...") hither:&nbsp;&nbsp; And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud (cp. "caught up... in clouds"); and their enemies beheld them":&nbsp;&nbsp; It may well be that <em><a href='B:730 11:12'>Rev 11:12</a></em> is speaking of the faithful Jewish remnant of the last days, who will be snatched away along with us.</p><p><em>From the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other- "</em>To the uttermost part of heaven"&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:480 13:27'>Mar 13:27</a></em>). Is this a reference to the believers being “caught away in clouds, into the air, for the purpose of meeting the Lord" (<em><a href='B:590 4:17'>1Th 4:17</a></em>)? It seems also an allusion to the lightning of :27. The Lord’s coming and His gathering of the elect is all in the same moment; and yet there are apparently various things which must occur all at the same time. The apparent contradictions in chronology need not worry us- see on :31&nbsp;<em>Power and great glory</em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:32'>Mat 24:32</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Now from the fig tree learn her parable</em>-</p><p> <em><a href='B:490 13:6-9'>Luk 13:6-9</a></em> records another parable of the fig tree, upon which that in the Olivet prophecy is based. Jesus, the dresser of God's vineyard of Israel, came seeking spiritual fruit on the fig tree, for the three years of his ministry. Because of the lack of it, the tree was cut down. Christ said "Now (i:e. towards the end of the tribulation period?) learn a parable of the fig tree" (<em><a href='B:470 24:32'>Mat 24:32</a></em>). It is tempting to read this as effectively meaning 'Now learn&nbsp;<em>the</em>&nbsp;parable of the fig tree', seeing that the parable of the Olivet prophecy is so similar to the previous fig tree parable:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p><em>When her branch has become tender</em>-</p><p> The obvious connection in Jewish minds would be with Messiah as the pre-eminent branch of Israel (<em><a href='B:290 11:1'>Isa 11:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 23:5'>Jer 23:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 33:15'>Jer 33:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 17:22'>Eze 17:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 3:8'>Zec 3:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 6:12'>Zec 6:12</a></em>). Luke 21 adds the detail that we are to look also at “all the trees”. A tender branch, all the trees, the Kingdom of God- these are all themes to be found in <em><a href='B:330 17:22-24'>Eze 17:22-24</a></em>: “Thus says the Lord Yahweh: I will also take of the lofty top of the cedar the dynasty of the house of David, and will set it. I will crop off from the topmost of its young twigs a tender one, and I will plant it on a high and lofty mountain. In the mountain of the height of Israel will I plant it the return of Christ to Mount Zion?; and it shall bring forth boughs, and bear fruit, and be a goodly cedar. Under it shall dwell all birds of every wing; in the shade of its branches shall they dwell this is the picture of Christ’s Kingdom- <em><a href='B:480 4:32'>Mar 4:32</a></em>. All the trees cp. “the fig tree and all the trees” of the field shall know that I, Yahweh, have brought down the high tree, have exalted the low tree, have dried up the green tree, and have made the dry tree to flourish. I, Yahweh, have spoken and have done it”. This last verse was clearly in the Lord’s mind as He was led out to Golgotha (<em><a href='B:490 23:31'>Luk 23:31</a></em>). This clearly Messianic language is associated by the Lord with the beginnings of spiritual fruit on the fig tree of Israel. The fig tree has to identify with Him as Messiah, become itself the tender branch, before fruit can be seen upon it.</p><p>I mentioned earlier in this exposition the strong parallels between the Olivet prophecy and the upper room discourse. The equivalent of the fig tree parable is in <em><a href='B:500 15:1-6'>Joh 15:1-6</a></em>: “I am the true vine and my Father is the husbandman. Every branch in me that carries no fruit, he prunes away; and every branch that carries fruit, he cleanses it, that it may bear more fruit. Already you are clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. Abide in me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, so neither can you, except you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. He that abides in me and I in him, the same carries much fruit. For severed from me you can do nothing. If a man does not abide in me, he is thrown out as a branch and withers, and these are gathered and thrown into the fire, and they are burned”. <em><a href='B:520 11:19'>Rom 11:19</a></em> in turn alludes here by associating the cut off, rejected branches with natural Israel. The branches are the tree, which is Christ. That same identification of the branch and Christ is made here in <em><a href='B:470 24:32'>Mat 24:32</a></em>. Putting together these teachings, the implication would be that for the branches of Israel to again be fruitful, they must be grafted back in, seeing they have been cut off. And that is the very teaching of Romans 11. “When his branch is yet…” is an attempt to translate a difficult original text. The idea may be ‘If, so long as… the branch is tender, it can yield fruit’. The broken off branches must be grafted back in and only ‘so long as’ that is the case, they can bear fruit. In the first century context, the Lord may be urging Israel to bring forth spiritual fruit- whilst the branch is still tender, whilst it was still connected to the tree, and had not been broken off and burnt as Romans 11 envisaged happening. And yet Israel would not. Hence the Lord’s appeal to His listeners to&nbsp;<em>learn</em>&nbsp;this parable. And hence the manner in which He placed this teaching as the conclusion to the Olivet prophecy, because Israel’s repentance is the key precondition in His return. John 15 is saying the same thing by warning that once severed from Christ, then there would be no chance of bearing fruit.</p><p><em>And puts forth its leaves-&nbsp;</em>The fig tree was to "shoot forth" (<em><a href='B:490 21:30'>Luk 21:30</a></em>) or 'germinate' (Young), witnessed by its putting forth of leaves (<em><a href='B:480 13:28'>Mar 13:28</a></em>) and tender branches (<em><a href='B:470 24:32'>Mat 24:32</a></em>). When the fig tree puts forth leaves there are often immature, unripe figs amongst them. Thus Jesus inspected the fig tree outside Jerusalem to see if it had any fruit, and cursed it because it did not. It had “leaves only” (<em><a href='B:470 21:19'>Mat 21:19</a></em>), but now the Lord seems to be saying that the presence of leaves will be a sign of His return. The obvious point of connection with <em><a href='B:470 21:19'>Mat 21:19</a></em> would suggest that He becomes more and more acceptant of&nbsp;<em>any&nbsp;</em>sign of spirituality and response in Israel; rather like the parable of the great supper features an increasing desperation on the part of the King to accept anyone who is willing to say “yes” to the invitation. "The time of&nbsp;<em>figs</em>&nbsp;was not yet", i:e. it was not reasonable to find fully developed fruit on it. The fig tree referred to the nation of Israel; Jesus expected to find at least the beginnings of some spiritual fruit, but due to the chronic dearth of response to his message, Jesus cursed the nation and dried it up (<em><a href='B:480 11:13-14'>Mar 11:13-14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 11:20'>Mar 11:20</a></em>). This would lead us to interpret the putting forth of leaves on the fig tree as the signs of an initial repentance and indication that real spiritual fruit is developing. It may well be that the whole of the Olivet prophecy has reference to a final three and a half year tribulation of the believers just prior to the second coming, and that during this time there will be a period of zealous witnessing to both Jews and Gentiles. This fits into place with the fig tree parable; this preaching starts to produce some degree of response from Israel, and then "all (is) fulfilled" in the full manifestation of Christ's Kingdom. The parable says that as surely as Summer follows Spring, so those who see the blossoming of the fig tree in the parable, will see the Kingdom. Maybe this is to be taken literally; there may be a literal gap of a few weeks/months (as between Spring and Summer) between the first signs of Jewish repentance, and all being fulfilled. It may well be that the "all" which will be fulfilled in <em><a href='B:490 21:32'>Luk 21:32</a></em> is to be equated with "the times of the Gentiles" being fulfilled (<em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em>). The Greek&nbsp;<em>kairos&nbsp;</em>translated “times” is also translated “opportunity”; the Gentiles’ opportunity to hear the Gospel is fast running out. There will be a call to Israel to repent in the last days, and a remnant will respond. This Elijah ministry and maybe our present witness to Jewry prepares the way for this? must occur “before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord”. We could interpret the putting forth of leaves on the fig tree as the signs of an initial repentance and indication that real spiritual fruit is developing.</p><p><em>You know</em>-</p><p> Luke 21 “you know in your own selves”. Seeing the repentance of Israel will lead to the faithful perceiving that the end is near. This perhaps alludes to the same idea as in <em><a href='B:680 1:19'>2Pe 1:19</a></em>, that the day star shall arise in the hearts of the believers just before the Lord comes:&nbsp;</p><p><em>That the summer is near</em>-</p><p> One way to look at this is that summer stood for harvest, obviously so in this context of fruit on a fig tree. But harvest was clearly a metaphor for judgment upon Israel, which is the context and burden of the Olivet prophecy. The Lord has lamented that the fig tree of Israel has nothing but leaves- and because of that, He had uttered judgment upon her (<em><a href='B:470 21:19-20'>Mat 21:19-20</a></em>). So the Lord could be simply repeating this is parabolic terms. The judgment / harvest / Summer was to come upon the fig tree whilst she had only leaves and not fruit on her tender branch. And yet the language of ‘shooting forth’ Gk. germinating in <em><a href='B:490 21:30'>Luk 21:30</a></em> suggests that more than mere leaves are in view. Summer will only come once there is fruit to harvest. That seems the point:&nbsp;</p><p>The shooting forth of the fig tree is given as the special sign that the Lord will return (<em><a href='B:490 21:30'>Luk 21:30</a></em>). This must be understood in the context of the Lord coming to the fig tree in Mark 11; He sought for at least the beginnings of fruit shooting forth, but found only leaves. And therefore He cursed the fig tree. He evidently saw the shooting forth of the fig tree as a figure of Israel's acceptance of Him, however immaturely. Likewise the parable of <em><a href='B:490 13:6-9'>Luk 13:6-9</a></em> makes the same connection between fruit on the fig tree and repentance within Israel. "Learn a (the) parable of the fig tree" (<em><a href='B:470 24:32'>Mat 24:32</a></em>) may suggest that we are to understand the fig tree parable in the light of these other fig tree parables. And there are several OT links between fruit on the fig and spiritual fruit in Israel (<em><a href='B:400 7:1'>Mic 7:1</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:470 7:15-16'>Mat 7:15-16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:350 9:10'>Hos 9:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:420 3:17-18'>Hab 3:17-18</a></em>). When the branch of Israel “is now become tender”, i:e. immediately this happens, we are to know that the eternal Summer of God’s Kingdom is nigh (<em><a href='B:470 24:32'>Mat 24:32</a></em> RV). The tenderness of the branch is surely to be connected with the hard heart of Israel becoming tender through their acceptance of Jesus and the new covenant. When we see just the beginnings of Israel’s repentance, through a remnant responding, we are to know that “He is near, even at the doors” (<em><a href='B:470 24:33'>Mat 24:33</a></em> RV). All this evidence steers us away from the idea that the fig tree became tender through the re-establishment of the nation of Israel- and towards an understanding that this is all about Israel’s repentance.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:33'>Mat 24:33</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Even so you also, when you see all these things</em>-</p><p> The structure of the argument suggests that “these things” specifically refers to the shooting forth of the fig tree:</p><p><table border="1"><tr><td></p><p><em><a href='B:470 24:32'>Mat 24:32</a></em></td><td><em><a href='B:470 24:33'>Mat 24:33</a></em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>When Gk:&nbsp;<em>hotan</em></td><td>When Gk:&nbsp;<em>hotan</em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>His branch is yet tender and puts forth leaves</td><td>You see all these things</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>You know Gk:&nbsp;<em>ginosko</em></td><td>You know Gk:&nbsp;<em>ginosko</em></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>That summer is near Gk:&nbsp;<em>eggus</em></td><td>That it is near Gk:&nbsp;<em>eggus</em>; <em><a href='B:490 21:32'>Luk 21:32</a></em> “That the Kingdom of God is near Gk:&nbsp;<em>eggus</em>”.</td><td></td></tr></table><p>The “Summer” meant ‘harvest’, and that was a metaphor for judgment. Verse 33 parallels this by saying that “it” is near. The “it” may well refer to the destruction of the temple, which is the context of the whole discussion; although <em><a href='B:490 21:32'>Luk 21:32</a></em> supplies “the Kingdom of God”. The Lord is bringing the discourse to a close by returning to the question which provoked it: “When shall these things be?”. And He appears to be saying in the first century context that so long as only leaves remained on the fig tree of Israel, then the Summer of harvest judgment upon her was going to come. And yet the Lord here is using language with two or more meanings, as Scripture often does. In the latter day context, He seems to be saying that once spiritual fruit is beginning on the Israel fig tree, then this is the ultimate sign that the ultimate end is near.</p><p><em>Know that he is near- at the doors-</em></p><p>&nbsp;The idea of Christ at the door is repeated by the Lord Himself in <em><a href='B:730 3:19-20'>Rev 3:19-20</a></em> - where it means that Jesus is asking others to repent and turn to Him. Opening the door means the Lord has granted forgiveness- His being at the door implies surely that He is asking for repentance:&nbsp;<em>Epi&nbsp;</em>the doors can carry the sense of ‘about’ or ‘upon’, perhaps an allusion to the Angels of Passover night, which is such a strong type of the second coming. That would explain the plural “doors”. I suggested that Summer / harvest may refer to judgment; being ‘upon the doors’ may likewise suggest the Angel of Death in judgment. This would certainly fit the first century interpretation offered above- that while only leaves are on the fig tree branch, whilst it is still ‘tender’ and attached to the tree before it has been broken off in judgment, then Summer / harvest / judgment is coming for sure, in that very generation. But words have multiple meanings, and this fact is not ignored by God in the way the Bible is written, nor by His Son in the way He spoke. The allusion can equally be to the Passover Angel who as it were restrained the Angel of Death by hovering over the blood-sprinkled doors of the faithful. This would continue the ‘other’ usage of language by the Lord in the fig tree parable, which means that once there is some beginnings of spiritual fruit on the fig tree of Israel, then the repentance of that remnant will mean that the coming of the Lord is literally imminent and He stands&nbsp;<em>epi</em>&nbsp;the doors as the fulfilment of the Passover Angel.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:34'>Mat 24:34</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Truly I say to you, This generation shall not pass away</em>-</p><p> This is similar to the Lord’s teaching that some of His generation would not die until they had seen the coming of the Kingdom (<em><a href='B:480 9:1'>Mar 9:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 9:27'>Luk 9:27</a></em>). His saying may not be linked directly to the fig tree parable, as if to say ‘The generation that sees the fig tree fruit will not pass away until…’. Rather He may be concluding His message by again making clear that the entire prophecy was going to come true in that generation. Seeing that lifespans were not much over 40 years at that time, even AD70 would not have seen many of that generation alive. He says elsewhere that the actual people He was speaking with would see these things come true and see Him coming in glory. But this potential possibility was disallowed from happening in that generation by the refusal of Israel to repent and the weakness of spirituality and effort to spread the Gospel in those who did apparently believe into Christ. The transfiguration was hardly the main fulfilment of the Lord’s words, even though the record of it directly follow the Lord’s predictions. Like the events of AD70, it was at best a shadow fulfilment of the final coming of the Kingdom in visible power and glory. The use of “<em>this</em>&nbsp;generation” rather than “<em>that</em>&nbsp;generation” surely suggests the Lord hoped for and indeed intended a fulfilment of His words literally in that very generation. But that generation passed- because fruit on the fig tree was not found. Israel did not repent, and there was little spiritual fruit on those Jews who did accept Christ. All 38 NT occurrences of&nbsp;<em>genea</em>, “generation”, clearly refer to the contemporary generation or group of listeners. Any attempt to interpret&nbsp;<em>genea</em>&nbsp;as referring to the race or nation of Israel becomes impossible because the text would require that the race or nation of Israel pass away at the Lord’s second coming, but Israel are clearly envisaged as existing as a separate entity in the Millennial Kingdom.</p><p><em>Until</em>-</p><p> If the Lord had meant simply 'until' we would read simply&nbsp;<em>heos</em>. But here we have two Greek words-&nbsp;<em>heos an</em>, which together denote a sense of conditionality and uncertainty. This is understandable if we understand that the Lord is talking of how His coming&nbsp;<em>could be</em>&nbsp;in that generation- but that depended upon some conditions which were beyond Him to fulfil and which depended upon men.</p><p><em>All these things are accomplished-&nbsp;</em>AV "Be fulfilled". There is surely a word play between&nbsp;<em>ginomai</em>&nbsp;"fulfilled" and&nbsp;<em>genea</em>&nbsp;"generation". That generation would not pass until all has 'become'. This is not the usual word used for the fulfilment of prophecies. When Matthew writes of the fulfilment of prophecies (and he does this often), the word&nbsp;<em>pleroo</em>&nbsp;is used. But here a much vaguer and more general word is used. Mark's record brings this out- the disciples ask when "all these things" would be "fulfilled" (<em>sunteleo</em>), and the Lord concludes the fig tree parable by saying "all these things" would be&nbsp;<em>ginomai</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:480 13:4'>Mar 13:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 13:30'>Mar 13:30</a></em>). That would appear purposeful; the Lord held out the definite possibility for His return in the first century and the fulfilment of all things He had spoken of. But He was surely aware that this could be rescheduled, and so He used a word pregnant with the possibility that "that generation" would see the 'coming into being' of the scenario He was presenting. That generation&nbsp;<em>ginomai</em>&nbsp;could have been the fulfilment&nbsp;<em>genea</em>&nbsp;of all things, or they could have been at least the coming into being of that fulfilment; even if they failed to respond, they would not be without significance in bringing into being the ultimate fulfilment.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:35'>Mat 24:35</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Heaven and earth may pass away</em>-</p><p> This could simply be saying to the effect 'Even if heaven and earth could pass, which they cannot, there is even less possibility that My words shall not be fulfilled'. <em><a href='B:470 5:18'>Mat 5:18</a></em> seems to use the term in that sense- "Even until&nbsp;<em>heos</em>, i:e. 'even if' heaven and earth pass...". In this case, we are not to even bother trying to understand 'heaven and earth' as 'a system of things', although this is certainly how the term is used, especially in the context of the Jewish system. And yet later New Testament allusion to this passage seems to suggest we are justified in seeing some reference to the Jewish, Mosaic system of the first century. <em><a href='B:650 12:26'>Heb 12:26</a></em> speaks as if heaven and earth are to be so shaken by the blood of Christ and the new covenant that they will pass away just as Sinai shook at the inauguration of the old covenant. <em><a href='B:680 3:7-13'>2Pe 3:7-13</a></em> is perhaps the clearest statement- the 'heaven and earth' which "are now" in the first century were to pass away and be replaced by a new heaven and earth in which righteousness dwells. Clearly 'heaven and earth' are not literal, because righteousness already dwells in literal Heaven, and the earth shall not be literally destroyed; this passing of 'heaven and earth' is patterned after the destruction of sinful&nbsp;<em>society&nbsp;</em>in Noah's time (<em><a href='B:680 3:5'>2Pe 3:5</a></em>). We note that the Olivet prophecy concludes with a warning that society would become like it was in the days of Noah. Clearly this major changeover did happen in the first century in that the Jewish and Mosaic system did finally pass away in AD70 with the destruction of the temple. And yet Peter's words also seem to demand application to the second coming of Christ and the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth. Clearly the heaven and earth of the Kingdom could have come in the first century, but 'all' that happened was that the Jewish and Mosaic systems were ended; this was in itself created a requirement for a&nbsp;<em>new&nbsp;</em>'heaven and earth' in which dwells righteousness, but that system has evidently not yet physically come on earth. In this sense, what happened in AD70 was a guarantee and a creation of the requirement for the new Kingdom to come- see on :34&nbsp;<em>Be fulfilled</em>.</p><p>The Greek word&nbsp;<em>Ge</em>&nbsp;"earth" is used often for the ‘land’ of Israel in the NT. We must remember that although the NT is written in Greek, it strongly reflects Hebrew usage of words. Again, the word commonly refers to the land of Israel. Consider some examples:&nbsp;-</p><p> “But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King” (<em><a href='B:470 5:34-35'>Mat 5:34-35</a></em>). This is alluding to the Jewish habit of swearing by their own land:&nbsp;-</p><p> “What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?” (<em><a href='B:470 17:25'>Mat 17:25</a></em>). The rulers of the earth were those ruling over Israel:&nbsp;-</p><p> “That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation” (<em><a href='B:470 23:35'>Mat 23:35</a></em>). The blood shed on the earth means that which was shed in the land:&nbsp;-</p><p> Heaven and earth passing away (<em><a href='B:470 24:35'>Mat 24:35</a></em>) follows on the Lord speaking of how all tribes of the earth / land would mourn in repentance (:30). He was speaking in the common OT idiom that used ‘heaven and earth’ for Israel. The nation would pass away in AD70, but His words would not.</p><p><em>But my words shall not pass away</em>-</p><p> The Lord uses&nbsp;<em>logos&nbsp;</em>here rather than any other term for ‘words’, perhaps because He perceived that it was the essence of what He was saying that would be fulfilled, rather than necessarily the very letter.</p><p>There seems a parallel with :34. "My words shall not pass away" is parallel with "This generation shall not pass away"; "Heaven and earth shall pass away" is parallel with "All these things being fulfilled". 'Heaven and earth' passing is therefore in the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth in fulfilment of all that was prophesied by the Lord. But there is then a parallel between "My words" and "this generation". The intention may be to show that that generation were to be identified with the Lord's words, and thereby with Himself. For whenever He elsewhere uses the term "My words", it is always in parallel to 'I Myself' (<em><a href='B:480 8:38'>Mar 8:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 12:48'>Joh 12:48</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 14:23'>Joh 14:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 15:27'>Joh 15:27</a></em>). He was His words; He was the quintessential logos. And that generation were to be identified with them. If they did so, if the tender branch of the fig tree became one with the Messianic branch of the Old Testament prophecies, then all would be fulfilled in that generation (see on :32).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:36'>Mat 24:36</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But of that day and hour</em>-</p><p>&nbsp;<em>Hemera&nbsp;</em>can refer to a period rather than a specific calendar day; it occurs often in the prophecy: “Those days” (:19), “those days should be shortened” (:22), “the tribulation of those days” (:29), “the days of Noah” (:37), “the days that were before the flood” (:38). So the Lord isn’t necessarily saying that there is a calendar day and hour within that day when He will return. He may even be implying that God has given us conditions to fulfil, and not a calendar date. There is no calendar date discernible from our side, because it is conditional. The Lord repeats this teaching in <em><a href='B:470 25:13'>Mat 25:13</a></em> when He says that we must watch exactly because “you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man comes”. When the disciples later asked to know this date, the Lord replied that “the times or seasons” have been “set within the Father’s own authority” (<em><a href='B:510 1:7'>Act 1:7</a></em> RV). This sounds like God has set up required preconditions, and the actual moment of the Lord’s return is somehow within frames of reference which His own authority alone has determined. But the Lord goes straight on to remind them of their calling to take the Gospel worldwide (<em><a href='B:510 1:8'>Act 1:8</a></em>); for that was one of the major preconditions. Instead of trying to discern a specific date ahead of time, they were instead to refocus upon the spreading of the Gospel. If all the mental effort put into trying to discern the calendar date had been put into simply spreading the Gospel, then perhaps the Lord would be here by now. However, there is also the possibility that in the very last days, the last generation&nbsp;<em>will</em>&nbsp;in fact know the day and hour- see below on&nbsp;<em>Knows no man</em>:&nbsp;</p><p><em>No one knows</em>-</p><p> There’s a major theme of knowing / seeing / perceiving in the Olivet prophecy:&nbsp;<em>Eido</em>, translated “knows”, carries the essential idea of ‘seeing’ or perceiving. We are to “see” / know / perceive the abomination of desolation (:15), and when we “see” / know / perceive “all these things, know that it is near” (:33). And yet, despite that, we can not know, at least at this stage, the day nor the hour of the Lord’s coming. The reason is made crystal clear in :42: “Watch&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;because you do not know s:w. what hour your Lord comes”. <em><a href='B:470 25:13'>Mat 25:13</a></em> repeats this: “Watch&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;because you do not know s:w. neither the day nor the hour in which your Lord comes”. The ‘watching’, therefore, is the watching of ourselves and for the welfare of others;&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;the activity of seeking to match world events with Bible prophecies. So our watching is exactly because we do not know the day and hour. God in His wisdom made it like this- so that we should watch all the time. If we knew when the Lord were coming, then we would not watch for Him until that time. Such is human nature. If a man knows what day and hour the thief is coming, he will watch for him at that time (:43). But if he doesn’t know, then he must watch all the time. So, looking at it from that point of view, it is absolutely necessary that we do&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;know the day and hour. And yet it seems so many have seriously misunderstood this. They think that they&nbsp;<em>can</em>&nbsp;work out the day and hour, and their ‘watching’ is not so much a personal readiness for the Lord’s coming at any moment as an extended scouring of the media in an attempt to slot various international happenings into Bible prophecies. Indeed it is observable that personal watchfulness often apparently comes to be excused because of ‘watching’ the “signs of the times”.</p><p>It is commonly thought that even the Lord Jesus doesn't know the time of his return, only the Father does. During his mortality, the Lord said exactly this (<em><a href='B:480 13:32'>Mar 13:32</a></em>)- at the time he was speaking to the disciples, he himself didn't know. But after his resurrection and glorification, the Lord made two statements to the disciples which he surely intended to be connected: "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth... it is not for you (the inquisitive eleven standing on Olivet) to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power" (<em><a href='B:470 28:18'>Mat 28:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 1:7-8'>Act 1:7-8</a></em>). But&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;the Father's power has been given to His glorified Son, and this therefore includes knowledge of the "times and seasons" of the second coming. In the exalted Lord "are hid all the riches of wisdom and knowledge" (<em><a href='B:580 2:3'>Col 2:3</a></em>); it is thereby inconceivable that the Father would still keep back some knowledge from the Son. The point of all this is that when the Lord Jesus said that "of that day and that hour knoweth (present tense) no man, no, not the angels... neither the Son" he was not laying down a general principle for all time. He was speaking of the situation at that time: 'You can't know now, indeed at the moment even I don't know; but these are the signs which will tell the believers when I'll come'. By implication he was saying 'You can't understand them, although I'm giving them to you, but in the future some will understand them, because these signs will accurately pinpoint my return'. This was exactly the spirit of what the Angel told Daniel when he too wished to know when Messiah would come in glory; he was basically told 'It's not for you to understand, but in the last days understanding of these things will be increased among God's people; they will know the time, but you can't'. There are so many connections between the Olivet prophecy and Daniel that perhaps it is legitimate to think that the Lord was alluding to the Angel's refusal to tell Daniel the time of Messiah's coming. That the Lord was primarily referring to the twelve when he spoke of them not knowing "when the time is" (<em><a href='B:480 13:33'>Mar 13:33</a></em>) is confirmed if we appreciate that the Lord Jesus sometimes uses "the time" as a reference to the appointed time for his own death (<em><a href='B:470 26:18'>Mat 26:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 14:35'>Mar 14:35</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 7:6'>Joh 7:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 7:8'>Joh 7:8</a></em>). The disciples were fascinated with the time of his return, and the Lord was giving them the signs. But knowing his death was only days away, inevitably he had in mind "the time" of his passion. And he knew that as they didn't know the time of his return, so they didn't understand the time of his death. Having pointed out that they knew not "the time", in words surely reminiscent of his criticism of Jewry generally for not knowing "the time" of his coming and death (<em><a href='B:470 16:3'>Mat 16:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 19:44'>Luk 19:44</a></em>), the Lord went on to tell the story of the man (himself) who left his household (the disciples) and told them to watch, with warnings as to what would happen if they didn't. Every one of those warnings, and some other language in the Olivet prophecy,&nbsp;came true of the disciples in the next few days, in the context of "the time" being the time of Christ's death:</p><p><table border="1"><tr><td></p><p>They shall deliver you up to&nbsp;&nbsp; the councils</td><td>As Christ to the Sanhedrin</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Beaten</td><td>Christ buffeted</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>rulers and kings for a testimony&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td>Chief priests, Herod, Pilate</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>…brother shall betray the brother&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td>Judas; Peter's denial?</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>…turn back to take up his garment&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td>John Mark's linen garment</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>…false Christs…&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td>An echo of 'Barabbas'?</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>the sun shall be darkened…&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td>As at the crucifixion</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Watch&nbsp;pray…&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td>"Watch with me"; Gethsemane</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>at even…&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td>Last Supper</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>at midnight...</td><td>Gethsemane</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>at the cock crowing</td><td>Peter's denials</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>in the morning</td><td>trials and crucifixion</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>find you sleeping</td><td>disciples in Gethsemane</td><td></td></tr></table><p>And at the end of the prophecy, He hammered this home again: "When (the trees) now shoot forth, ye see it, and know of your own selves that Summer is now nigh at hand. So likewise ye, when ye see these things... know ye" (<em><a href='B:490 21:30-31'>Luk 21:30-31</a></em> RV). The very personal feeling within us that Summer is near is likened to our knowledge of the imminence of the Lord's coming; you can't be told by anyone else that Summer's coming, you see the signs, and you know within your own self:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Not even the Angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father</em>-</p><p> A clear indication of their limited knowledge, which helps explain their ‘testing’ of God’s servants in some Old Testament incidents, apparently in order to obtain more knowledge about them.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:37'>Mat 24:37</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And as</em>-</p><p> The similarity with Noah’s days is logically linked to the Lord’s word about not knowing the day nor the hour. In the digression about this, I suggest that the very last generation may in fact know the day and hour. And that would be similar to Noah. There is no indication that he knew exactly when the flood would come- until he was told right at the end of the period, that the time had come and he must enter the ark.</p><p><em>Were the days-</em></p><p>&nbsp;“The days” are parallel with “the coming” of the Lord. The scenario outlined earlier in these notes is of the Lord ‘coming’ for the faithful, them consciously choosing to go to meet Him, and then their ‘coming’ along with Him in judgment upon the unfaithful and Israel’s immediate enemies. Therefore a period of time is made parallel with the Lord’s “coming”. See on :36&nbsp;<em>That day</em>. The "days of Noah" may refer to the way in which God told Noah of the flood, but in <em><a href='B:10 7:1'>Gen 7:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:10 7:4'>Gen 7:4</a></em> told him that now there were "yet seven days" until the flood actually came, and he must now enter the ark. The gathering of the animals was done within those seven days (<em><a href='B:10 7:1-3'>Gen 7:1-3</a></em>). In this lies the similarity with the last days. We know the outline picture- that judgment will come, and there are reasons and signs of that. But only a few days before judgment breaks will the faithful be invited to go to meet the Lord, to enter the ark. And in that period the Gospel will be spread to all nations, the last final appeal will be made. Just as Noah filled the huge ark, which could have saved so many people, with any animal willing to agree to come on board. The shutting of the door of the ark would then directly correspond with <em><a href='B:470 25:10'>Mat 25:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 13:25'>Luk 13:25</a></em>: "The door was shut". Just as desperate people would've knocked on the shut door of the ark, so the unfaithful will knock on the door which the Lord has now closed. In this life we can knock on the closed door, recognizing our condemnation- and it will be opened (<em><a href='B:490 11:7'>Luk 11:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 3:8'>Rev 3:8</a></em>). But after the Lord has 'come' in the sense of inviting us into the ark, to go forth and meet Him, the door will be shut.</p><p><em>Of Noah-&nbsp;</em>A number of passages describe the AD70 judgments of Israel in terms of the flood; which suggests that they also have reference to the last days:-</p><p> 2 Peter 3 is a clear example, describing the destruction of the Jewish system in AD70 as being by fire as opposed to water used in Noah's time. Yet the chapter also has reference, e.g. through its links with the new Heavens and earth of Isaiah 65, with the destruction of the present age at the Lord's return.-</p><p> Nahum 1 describes the coming judgements on Israel in terms of mountains and hills splitting, and there being a great flood; all Genesis flood language.-</p><p> <em><a href='B:340 9:26'>Dan 9:26</a></em> describes the Romans in AD70 destroying "the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood", the LXX implying with a sudden flood, as in Noah's time.-</p><p> <em><a href='B:290 54:9'>Isa 54:9</a></em> describes the judgments on Israel being "as the waters of Noah". The end of the flood, the end of Israel's judgments, therefore typifies the second coming.-</p><p> In the light of this the Lord's parable about the man building on sand whose house was destroyed when the heavy rain came (<em><a href='B:470 7:25'>Mat 7:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 7:27'>Mat 7:27</a></em>) must have primary reference (as so many of the parables do) to the judgement on the Jewish house in AD70. Those who built on sand as a result of not hearing Christ's words were the Jews- also described as shoddy builders in <em><a href='B:470 21:42'>Mat 21:42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 4:11'>Act 4:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 2:7'>1Pe 2:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:400 3:10'>Mic 3:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 22:13'>Jer 22:13</a></em>.-</p><p> The flood waters were upon the earth for 5 months. The siege of Jerusalem in AD70 lasted for the same period, coming after 3 years of the Roman campaign against Israel which started in AD67. The three and a half year suffering of Israel which culminated in AD70 may well point forward to a similar period in the last days; in which case the flood would typify the final months of that period, during which the judgments will be poured out most intensely. The five month tribulation of <em><a href='B:730 9:10'>Rev 9:10</a></em> may also have some relevance here.</p><p>Thus the state of Israel in AD70 was typified by the world of Noah's time, which therefore looks forward also to the last days, in the light of the evident connections between that period and our last days which are made in 2 Peter 3 and the Olivet prophecy.</p><p><em>So shall be the coming of the Son of Man</em>-</p><p> This commonly used phrase (<em><a href='B:470 16:28'>Mat 16:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:27'>Mat 24:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:30'>Mat 24:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:39'>Mat 24:39</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 26:64'>Mat 26:64</a></em>) clearly quotes from <em><a href='B:340 7:13'>Dan 7:13</a></em>: “One like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven”. This prophecy clearly speaks of the giving of the Kingdom to the Lord Jesus and His people at the end of the dominion of the fourth beast and its related horns. The prophecy could have been fulfilled in the first century- but it was rescheduled. This is another example of the conditionality in Daniel’s prophecies which we discussed in an earlier digression. <em><a href='B:340 7:13'>Dan 7:13</a></em> speaks of how the Son of Man comes with the clouds of Heaven&nbsp;<em>before the Ancient of Days</em>&nbsp;and is given the Kingdom. What is in view is not so much the coming of Christ to earth but His coming to receive the Kingdom from the Father. <em><a href='B:340 7:26-27'>Dan 7:26-27</a></em>: “The judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it to the end. The kingdom and the dominion, and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole Heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High: His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey Him”. “The Son of Man” is here interpreted as “the people of the saints of the Most High”. The Son of Man, therefore, refers not just to the Lord personally but to all those in Him. Having chosen to go out to meet Him once they hear the trumpet call, they are snatched away to meet Him in the air and the Lord comes with them in judgment. This is the picture presented in <em><a href='B:590 4:16-17'>1Th 4:16-17</a></em> and elsewhere. This is why His “coming” is parallel with a period of time- see on&nbsp;<em>The days</em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:38'>Mat 24:38</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For as in those days which were before the flood</em>-</p><p> See on :37, perhaps a reference to the immediate seven days before the coming of the flood:&nbsp;<em>Pro&nbsp;</em>("before") would suggest 'immediately before', something standing directly in front of something else. Perhaps those seven days were a period of feasting in the world around Noah, just as there will be a brief period of hedonistic prosperity in the world before Christ's coming, perhaps because of some international agreement which offers prosperity to the entire planet in return for some nominal acceptance of false religion Islam?. We note the period of "seven days" used for funeral celebrations (<em><a href='B:10 50:10'>Gen 50:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:90 31:13'>1Sa 31:13</a></em>), wedding celebrations (<em><a href='B:70 14:12'>Jdg 14:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 14:17'>Jdg 14:17</a></em>) and general feasting (<em><a href='B:190 1:5'>Est 1:5</a></em>; Job 1). The people around Noah were doing this right up until the last day of the seven days. Passover, a clear type of the final deliverance of God's people at the Lord's second coming, required a similar seven days preparation period (<em><a href='B:20 12:19'>Exo 12:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 13:6'>Exo 13:6</a></em>) followed by a "day of the Lord", the actual feast, and "a solemn assembly" (<em><a href='B:160 8:18'>Neh 8:18</a></em>). Indeed, the feasts of Yahweh all required a seven day period (Leviticus 23), and each of them was in some way typical of the second coming:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p><em>They were eating and drinking</em>-</p><p> <em><a href='B:490 21:34'>Luk 21:34</a></em> is specific: "And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, so that day come upon you unawares". It could fairly be asked 'Why is there this warning, if the believers of the last days are to be actively persecuted?'. This verse implies that the world will be in a materially prosperous state in the last days; it will be possible for us to become so preoccupied with it that we do not prepare for the time of tribulation, so that it comes as a sudden surprise. Of if "that day" is the day of Christ's coming, then it may be that by opting out of the persecution, we will be able to continue to enjoy the materialism of the world, in which case we will be caught unawares by the second coming. Thus while the saints are persecuted, the world enjoys a time of prosperity as it did in the times of Lot and Noah.</p><p><em>Marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark</em>-</p><p> <em><a href='B:470 25:10'>Mat 25:10</a></em> continues the Noah allusion by saying that the faithful 'enter in with Him' (s:w:), and the door is shut, just as it was with the ark.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:39'>Mat 24:39</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And they did not realize until</em>-</p><p> The implication is that they did “know”, but tragically too late. In the moment of their condemnation they saw it all, so clearly; just as the process of condemnation so often results in men ‘knowing Yahweh’, but all too late. They will proclaim blessing on Jesus as Messiah next time they see Him, i:e. at judgment day (<em><a href='B:490 13:35'>Luk 13:35</a></em>). But all too late. This is the basis for the gnashing of teeth in anger with oneself which :51 speaks of.</p><p><em>The flood came-&nbsp;</em>Gk:&nbsp;<em>erchomai</em>. This is effectively the same word as used in :38 about Noah "entering" or 'coming into' the ark (<em>eis-erchomai</em>). The coming of the flood represents the coming of Jesus to the world-<em>erchomai</em>&nbsp;is so often used in the context in that connection (<em><a href='B:470 24:30'>Mat 24:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:42-44'>Mat 24:42-44</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:46'>Mat 24:46</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:48'>Mat 24:48</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:6'>Mat 25:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:10'>Mat 25:10</a></em>). The 'coming in' of Noah into the ark (cp. the response of the faithful to the call to go out and meet the returning Lord Jesus) is essentially the coming of the Lord, even if His public 'coming' may be a few days after the 'coming' to the believers. Keil translates <em><a href='B:340 9:26-27'>Dan 9:26-27</a></em>:&nbsp;“The city, together with the sanctuary, shall be destroyed by the people of the prince who shall come, who shall find his end in the flood; but war shall continue to the end, since destruction is irrevocably decreed. That prince shall force a strong covenant for one week on the mass of the people, and during half a week he shall take away the service of sacrifice, and borne on the wings of idol abominations cp. <em><a href='B:230 18:10'>Psa 18:10</a></em>, where the true God is also borne on wings shall carry on a desolating rule, till the firmly decreed judgment shall pour itself upon him as one desolated” (<em>Commentary&nbsp;</em>&nbsp; p. 373). Antichrist’s destruction with&nbsp;<em>the</em>&nbsp;flood note the definite article comfortably connects with the Lord’s usage of the flood as a symbol of the latter day judgment upon His enemies (<em><a href='B:470 24:39'>Mat 24:39</a></em>). The person spoken about will be involved in war until the end of his days; he will die at the end of his military campaign against God’s people. This was certainly not true of Titus in AD70.</p><p><em>And took them all away. So shall the coming of the Son of Man be</em>-</p><p> The 'coming' of the flood represents the 'coming' of the Lord; just as the unbelieving world were 'taken away', so :40 continues that theme, that one shall be "taken" and another left. The 'taking away' of the one in the field is therefore 'taking away' in condemnation rather than the snatching away of the faithful to meet the Lord. The Greek&nbsp;<em>airo</em>&nbsp;definitely means to be taken&nbsp;<em>up</em>. Upward movement into the air is definitely in view. It could be that the Lord has in view the responsible. Those who respond to the call and want to go and meet their Lord will be confirmed in that by being caught up to meet Him (<em><a href='B:590 4:16-17'>1Th 4:16-17</a></em>). Those who delay, the foolish virgins who go to buy oil, will all the same be gathered to judgment by being snatched away- but just a short time later.</p>


text:
<p>24:40&nbsp;<em>Then two men shall be in the field. One shall be taken and one left</em>-</p><p> The 'taking away' is in judgment / condemnation / destruction, just as the unbelieving world were 'taken away' (:39). The idea of not being 'left' is what the Olivet prophecy started with- not one stone would be "left" (s:w:, <em><a href='B:470 24:2'>Mat 24:2</a></em>). But there will not be the total destruction of all persons on the earth at this time. The unworthy responsible will be 'taken away'- see on :39&nbsp;<em>And took them all away</em>-</p><p> and those not responsible to judgment will be "left". The Greek has a wide range of possible meanings here- the word is translated 'forgiven', 'sent away', and perhaps there is here the hint that they will be preserved to hear the Gospel of the Kingdom. In this sense we must remember the Lord's definition that "the field is the word" (<em><a href='B:470 13:38'>Mat 13:38</a></em>). And earlier in the Olivet prophecy He has foreseen that the faithful who are called away will be "in the field" (:18). The parable of the prodigal son likewise features the two sons, both in a field (<em><a href='B:490 15:15'>Luk 15:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 15:25'>Luk 15:25</a></em> s:w:). The prodigal leaves the field and goes to the Father. The older son refuses to ultimately leave the field and go in to the Father. Legalism and judgmentalism is therefore quite enough to warrant being 'taken away' to condemnation:&nbsp;</p><p>The present tense is used here. Therefore the RV gives “One is taken, the other is left”. Perhaps this was to heighten our sense that the essence of judgment is now; the call of the Gospel is a call to journey to judgment day. The same arresting use of the present tense in the Greek is to be found in :41 and :43- perhaps for the same reason.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:41'>Mat 24:41</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Two women</em>-</p><p> So much of the Lord’s teaching sensitively gives examples including men, and then including women. He was so very far ahead of His time in being so gender inclusive:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Shall be grinding at the mill. One shall be taken and one left</em>-</p><p> Using millstones, which are always used in the Bible as symbolic of condemnation. These people were working out their own condemnation. One the responsible would be taken away to destruction, the other not responsible to Divine judgment would be “left”. See on :40.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:42'>Mat 24:42</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore, stay awake For you do not know on what day your Lord comes</em>-</p><p> Throughout Christ's discourses concerning his return, "watch / stay awake" is the key-word (<em><a href='B:470 24:42'>Mat 24:42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:13'>Mat 25:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 13:33-37'>Mar 13:33-37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 12:37'>Luk 12:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 21:36'>Luk 21:36</a></em>). There are at least ten New Testament allusions to Christ's command for us to "watch" in the last days, and thus be found loving the appearing of Christ; this alone indicates how our lives should be characterized by this spirit of watching. I would go so far as to say that generally we seem almost unaware of this emphasIs. "Watch... watch... watch" is the cry that comes out from our Lord himself. It seems almost unknown to us that we are&nbsp;<em>commanded</em>&nbsp;by the Lord Jesus Christ himself, with a great sense of urgency, to live in this spirit of watchfulness for His return. It is easy to think that the command to watch means that we should scan Bible prophecies and compare them with current world events, and thereby see the coming of Christ approaching. However, this is not the idea behind the word "watch". We are told to watch precisely because we do&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;know the time of Christ's appearing; therefore Jesus cannot be telling us (in this command) to watch political developments as pointers towards the date of His return. "Watch" nearly always refers to watching our personal spirituality, and concerning ourselves with that of others’. The Hebrew word translated "watch" carries the idea of defending, holding on as a matter of life or death, enduring with stamina, being awake. Thus Habakkuk speaks of "watching", i:e. being spiritually sensitive, to what God is going to tell him (<em><a href='B:420 2:1'>Hab 2:1</a></em>). Doing a study of New Testament allusions to Christ's command to "watch" yields conclusions which may seem unpleasantly negative to some. In Greek, the verb 'to watch' is related to the noun 'watch', referring to soldiers guarding something, or the period of guard duty. The idea behind 'watching' is definitely defensive rather than aggressive. In the same way as the gate keeper of a large house has to watch, to guard and protect, so should we in the last days (<em><a href='B:480 13:34-37'>Mar 13:34-37</a></em>). <em><a href='B:490 21:36'>Luk 21:36</a></em> defines watching as praying always, concentrating our faith upon the fact that ultimately we will stand acceptably before the Lord Jesus at the day of judgment, and by His grace be saved from the great judgments which will surely come upon this world. The ideas of watching and praying often occur together (<em><a href='B:490 21:36'>Luk 21:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 14:38'>Mar 14:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 26:41'>Mat 26:41</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 6:18'>Eph 6:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 4:7'>1Pe 4:7</a></em>). Prayer for our forgiveness, for acceptance by our Lord, must therefore characterize our watching in these last days. We must " watch" in the sense of being on our guard against the possibility of personal and communal apostasy from the faith (<em><a href='B:510 20:31'>Act 20:31</a></em>); "watching" is standing fast in the doctrines of the one faith (<em><a href='B:530 16:13'>1Co 16:13</a></em>), exhorting and encouraging others in the household of faith (<em><a href='B:590 5:6'>1Th 5:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 5:11'>1Th 5:11</a></em>), holding fast in ecclesias swamped by apathy and apostasy, strengthening what remains (<em><a href='B:730 3:2-3'>Rev 3:2-3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:3-5'>2Ti 4:3-5</a></em>), keeping the oil of the word burning in our lamps even though others have let it burn out (<em><a href='B:470 25:13'>Mat 25:13</a></em>).</p><p>The blessedness of the 'watching’ is not that they have an accurate timeline in place; we must watch&nbsp;exactly because we&nbsp;<em>don’t</em>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<em>can’t&nbsp;</em>know the exact time of the Lord's return. We cannot, therefore, have a detailed timeline which tells us&nbsp;<em>for sure</em>&nbsp;that Jesus will return after event x or y. We can speculate, of course, but we cannot say for sure. The message is to be ready, to love Him and His return, just because we<em>&nbsp;don’t&nbsp;</em>know when exactly He is coming (<em><a href='B:470 24:42'>Mat 24:42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:13'>Mat 25:13</a></em>). ‘Watching' means holding to our faith and repenting of our weaknesses in <em><a href='B:730 3:3'>Rev 3:3</a></em> - not interpreting latter day prophecies. This of itself won't make us spiritual people. The Greek word translated&nbsp;“watch" is usually translated "imprison" - the idea is of guarding oneself and ones' faith, "vigilantly" watching&nbsp;out against the Biblical devil same word in <em><a href='B:670 5:8'>1Pe 5:8</a></em>, rather than searching for the understanding of latter day prophecy.</p><p>We do not know the exact calendar date of the appearing of Christ; and yet we should be watching for his coming with the same intensity&nbsp;<em>as if</em>&nbsp;we did know the day and hour. This seems to be the message behind <em><a href='B:470 24:42-43'>Mat 24:42-43</a></em>, where Jesus reasons that if the manager of a wealthy house knew when the thief was coming, he would have watched carefully; 'And that', Jesus continued, 'Should be the intensity of expectancy&nbsp;<em>you</em>&nbsp;should have towards my return, even though you don't know the exact date'. Now this is quite something. If we knew the exact date of the Lord's return, we can imagine how we might behave the day before. It seems Christ is asking us to imagine that scenario; and then He asks us to live like this all the time. This is truly a high challenge. Our attitude to God's word, entertainment, hobbies, money, relationships; all these areas of life would probably be somewhat different to what they are now if we really took on board this idea: that we should live&nbsp;<em>as if</em>&nbsp;we expect the imminent return of Christ. This idea makes sense of two apparently contradictory strands in the Lord’s teaching: that we do not know the exact time of His return (<em><a href='B:470 24:36'>Mat 24:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:42'>Mat 24:42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:44'>Mat 24:44</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:13'>Mat 25:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 1:7'>Act 1:7</a></em>), and yet He tells us clearly it will come “soon” (<em><a href='B:730 1:1'>Rev 1:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 1:3'>Rev 1:3</a></em> and many other passages). Perhaps the implication is that we should read coming ‘soon’ as meaning ‘as&nbsp;<em>if</em>&nbsp;you know He is coming soon’. For, we ourselves cannot know the exact time.</p><p>&nbsp; <em><a href='B:370 5:18'>Amo 5:18</a></em> and <em><a href='B:460 3:1-2'>Mal 3:1-2</a></em> warn that just desiring the coming of the Lord isn’t enough; for what end will it be, if we don’t&nbsp;<em>truly</em>&nbsp;love His appearing? Yet Amos goes on to say that Israel “put far away” the reality of the day of the Lord, in their minds (<em><a href='B:370 6:3'>Amo 6:3</a></em>). And yet they desired it. We can study prophecy, but not really love His appearing in seriously preparing ourselves for that day. Indeed, we can subconsciously put it far from us. When we grasp for a fleeting moment how&nbsp;<em>very near</em>&nbsp;is the second coming for us; can we dwell upon it, retain that intensity? Or would we rather put it “far away”? This is surely why the Lord brings the list of signs of His coming to a close with some chilling parables concerning the need for personal watchfulness. It’s as if He could foresee generations of believers straining to interpret His words carefully, correctly matching them with trends in the world... and yet missing the essential point: that we must watch and prepare ourselves for His coming, whenever it may be for us. Having given so many indicators of His soon appearing, the Lord then says that His coming will be unexpected by the believers (<em><a href='B:470 24:36'>Mat 24:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:44'>Mat 24:44</a></em>). He wasn’t saying ‘Well, you’ll never properly interpret what I’ve just said’. He meant rather: ‘OK you’ll know, more or less, when my return is imminent; but all the same,&nbsp;<em>in reality</em>&nbsp;it will be terribly unexpected for most of you unless you prepare yourselves. You need to make personal changes, and be watchful of yourselves; otherwise all the correct prophetic interpretation in the world is meaningless’.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:43'>Mat 24:43</a></em><em>&nbsp;But know this-&nbsp;</em>Our focus should be on ‘knowing’ that we don’t ‘know’ the time of His coming; and therefore watching at all times, living&nbsp;<em>as if</em>&nbsp;His return is imminent. This would be one explanation of why Paul and Peter write in their letters as if the Lord’s return is imminent when in fact He did not return in the first century.</p><p><em>That if the master of the house had known in what watch</em>-</p><p> The Lord is drawing a parallel between the householder watching, and the disciples / believers watching, being aware of the possibility of the Lord's return at any moment. He will only come unexpectedly, as a thief, to those who are not watching and are caught unprepared. But almost every usage of&nbsp;<em>oikodespotes</em>&nbsp;in the parables is concerning the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:470 10:25'>Mat 10:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 13:27'>Mat 13:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 20:1'>Mat 20:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 20:11'>Mat 20:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 21:33'>Mat 21:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 13:25'>Luk 13:25</a></em>). As so often, the Lord was speaking to the disciples but not forgetting to speak also to Himself. He was soon to ask them in Gethsemane to watch and pray&nbsp;<em>with Him</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:470 26:38'>Mat 26:38</a></em>); as if His watchfulness was to be theirs. In <em><a href='B:470 13:52'>Mat 13:52</a></em> He does also use this term about every scribe instructed in the things of the Kingdom. We are all the master of the house in the sense that we are to all be watching out for the household as a whole; the work of the Lord Jesus is to be our work. 'Watching' is thereby defined as not only watching ourselves, but watching out for the rest of the household. This is being presented here as the supreme way of not becoming unwatchful. By watching out for others we are watching for the Lord's return, living with the imminence of His coming over before us.</p><p><em>The thief was coming</em>-</p><p> Gk ‘is coming’. See on <em><a href='B:470 24:40'>Mat 24:40</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Taken… left</em>.</p><p><em>He would have stayed awake</em>-</p><p> The point is surely that if we were to know when the Lord is coming, then we would watch for Him&nbsp;<em>at the time of His coming</em>; just as a householder would watch out for a thief if he knew ahead of time when the thief was coming. Because we do not know when the Lord is coming, we must watch for His coming all the time, living&nbsp;<em>as if</em>&nbsp;He is coming imminently even though we do not&nbsp;<em>know</em>&nbsp;for sure whether He is or not. Therefore our living as if He is about to come is to be done independently of any hunches we may have that He is about to return, based as they usually are upon prophetic interpretations. <em><a href='B:490 12:35-38'>Luk 12:35-38</a></em> repeats the same teaching, but with the metaphor of men keeping watch all night so that they might open to the Lord immediately.</p><p><em>And would not have let his house be broken into</em>-</p><p> This is the key; recognizing that the household of God is in fact our household, and we are to watch out for it as we would for our very own family. Indeed, it&nbsp;is<em>&nbsp;</em>our family. The connection is to <em><a href='B:470 23:38'>Mat 23:38</a></em> “<em>Your house</em>&nbsp;is left unto you desolate”. Here, “<em>his house</em>” is “broken up”. The Lord is saying that they were in the status of condemnation already. The physical breaking up of the temple would be the result of the elders of Israel not ‘watching’ as intended.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:44'>Mat 24:44</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore you also must be ready</em>-</p><p> The Lord was initially speaking to the disciples, the future elders of the church. The elders, represented by "the goodman of the house", have a special responsibility in this watching, so that the Lord's return is not thief-like to the 'house' of their ecclesia (<em><a href='B:470 24:43'>Mat 24:43</a></em>):&nbsp; They "watch for your souls" (<em><a href='B:650 13:17'>Heb 13:17</a></em>). But in a sense, the duty of watching falls to each of us: we're all elders (<em><a href='B:490 12:41-46'>Luk 12:41-46</a></em>). All believers are called to watch, and that watching involves watching for others. The connection with <em><a href='B:590 5:2'>1Th 5:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 5:6'>1Th 5:6</a></em> therefore suggests that one of the reasons for the unworthy experiencing the second coming "as a thief" will be the lack of awareness by their elders concerning the spiritual trials of the last days. The reverse is also true:&nbsp;A good latter-day elder will have to give his very soul to the work of watching over the flock, fully aware of the many dangers they face in the last days:&nbsp;&nbsp; It is difficult to see how this vital role can be filled by those who have sold their souls to demanding employers. This work can’t be simply left to others. This passage teaches that the servant who must feed the household with appropriate food represents each of us; he must watch for the Lord's return and be diligent in feeding the household; yet (it must be stressed), this parable is intended for each of us (cp. <em><a href='B:480 13:37'>Mar 13:37</a></em>). If he doesn't do this, he is rejected. We are set a high standard here. Christ is "the goodman of the house" (<em><a href='B:470 20:11'>Mat 20:11</a></em>), but here "the goodman of the house" represents each of us (<em><a href='B:470 24:43'>Mat 24:43</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 12:39-40'>Luk 12:39-40</a></em>). We are in Him, and therefore we must try to share his level of concern for his household. He carried his cross for us, for our salvation. And he asks us to share His cross, i:e. His devotion to the body of believers, even unto death. If we are in Him, we too must devote ourselves to the saving of the body.</p><p>The very same word and idea for "ready" is repeated in <em><a href='B:470 25:10'>Mat 25:10</a></em>. Those who were "ready" and responded immediately to the news of the Lord's return were accepted. The 'readiness' is in being constantly ready to leave all and go to&nbsp;be with the Lord. We shouldn't be so surprised, therefore, that life in this world is so unbearable for the believers; for we are being led to a point where we will be ready and eager to leave all for the sake of being with the Lord.</p><p><em>For the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect</em>-</p><p> The fact we do not know the date of the Lord's return is what makes us live in a spirit of constant readiness for His coming. The point is that we should be “ready” even when we “think not” that the Lord’s coming is near. The contrast is being drawn between on one hand our ‘readiness’, and on the other, our ‘thinking’, our computing, our calculations, the seeming to us, that the return of Christ is near.</p><p>"The Son of Man comes" uses the present tense, whereas “Be… ready” would properly require the future tense. There may be here a hint that the future coming of the Son of Man in essence is ongoing in the life of the believer.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:45'>Mat 24:45</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Who then</em>-</p><p> Translated “What manner of man?” in <em><a href='B:480 4:41'>Mar 4:41</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 1:66'>Luk 1:66</a></em>.</p><p><em>Is the faithful and wise servant</em>-</p><p> The Lord has just likened us to the master of the house, but now He explains further. We have responsibility for the house and act in the role of the householder because He has given us that responsibility. Our ‘watching’ is to be expressed in terms of ensuring that all the household have their food at the appropriate time. In <em><a href='B:480 13:34-35'>Mar 13:34-35</a></em> the Lord expands on this parable in saying that each of the servants are given a different work, but He wants us to be like the doorkeeper AV “porter”, whose job it was to simply watch- and “You, watch, therefore”. Putting together the various images, we see that we are likened to the very master of the house; then to the chief steward who was to provide food for the household; and then to the lowest doorkeeper. We are thoroughly representative of the Lord Himself, the steward of the household, and the lowest servant, the doorkeeper. But throughout the analogies, we are to above all mirror the way in which they watched / looked out for the wellbeing of the household. Being occupied with this is what makes a person ready and watching for their Lord’s return.</p><p>This is the “good and faithful s:w. servant” of <em><a href='B:470 25:21'>Mat 25:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:23'>Mat 25:23</a></em> who is commended for trading his Lord’s goods and making increase of them. Here, the duty of the faithful servant is to care for the household. These are different metaphors for the same reality- spiritual care for others is a way of increasing the overall wealth of the Lord and the progress of His household. We have been delegated a huge amount, and the Lord is ‘absent’, not in the sense that He is not spiritually with us, but in that He will not intervene in how we carry on His work. The salvation and spiritual prosperity of others is therefore in our hands. By laziness and unwise behaviour we can seriously damage them and limit the progress of the Lord’s business; and He being ‘absent’ will not forcibly intervene to stop us, in this life. The “wise servant” is likewise to be connected with the “wise s:w. virgins” of the very next parable (<em><a href='B:470 25:2'>Mat 25:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:4'>Mat 25:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:8-9'>Mat 25:8-9</a></em>). The connection is, however, slightly odd. The wise servant is to provide food for the others in the household. The wise virgins were unable to provide oil for the weaker members of the household, because they were themselves weak and had fallen asleep when clearly they were intended to remain awake. If the connection with the next parable is indeed purposeful, then we are left with the picture of the wise virgins being wise only in that they&nbsp;<em>intended</em>&nbsp;to provide for others, although in reality they were too weak themselves to follow through with that intention in practice. But their intention to do so was counted to them as wisdom.</p><p><em>Whom his lord has set over his household</em>-</p><p> This parable is repeated with the same Greek words in <em><a href='B:490 12:42-43'>Luk 12:42-43</a></em> but with a change in tense: “Who then is the faithful and wise steward whom his master shall set over his household to give them their portion of food in due season? Blessed is that servant, whom his master, when he comes, shall find so doing”. The idea is surely that if we are doing that now, we shall do it eternally. If we are found ‘doing’ care and provision for the household, then we shall be empowered to eternally do this in essence. The important thing is that when the Lord comes, He finds us engaged at least mentally with what we shall eternally be doing, living the essence of the Kingdom life now. We have been made ruler over the household now; we shall be set over it eternally if when the Lord comes He finds us doing what He has appointed us to do. See on <em><a href='B:470 24:47'>Mat 24:47</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Shall make him ruler</em>.</p><p><em>To give them their food in due time?</em>-</p><p> When the Lord comes, He finds the servant either smiting the servants (:49), or feeding and caring for them (:45). Our attitude to our brethren in the moment of our Lord’s coming will decide our eternal future. The structure of the parable allows of no half way position. The purpose of any authority given to any of us within the household is in order to feed others. If that, in the end, is not being done, then we are abusing the trust and authority given us by the Lord. The “food” is called their&nbsp;<em>sitometron&nbsp;</em>in <em><a href='B:490 12:42'>Luk 12:42</a></em>, their “portion of food”, or ration. The impression is given of a steward providing the right food ‘nourishment’ for the right persons at the right time. This is the essence of all care for others:&nbsp;<em>Kairos</em>, “due season”, means literally ‘time’, and is often used about ‘the time’ of the Lord’s return (<em><a href='B:470 8:29'>Mat 8:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 13:30'>Mat 13:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 16:3'>Mat 16:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 21:34'>Mat 21:34</a></em>). Indeed it is used in the Olivet prophecy for this moment: “You know not when the time is” (<em><a href='B:480 13:33'>Mar 13:33</a></em>). The idea seems to be that instead of worrying about calculating “the time” of the Lord’s coming, we are instead to be concerned with feeding others in the household at that&nbsp;<em>kairos</em>&nbsp;or time. This is the sign of our preparedness and watchfulness, and not our apparent skill in matching world events to Bible prophecies.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:46'>Mat 24:46</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Blessed is that servant</em>-</p><p> The only other reference by the Lord to blessed servants is in <em><a href='B:490 12:37-38'>Luk 12:37-38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 12:43'>Luk 12:43</a></em> where He teaches the blessedness of the servant who is found awake / watching when his Lord returns. ‘Watching’ is a major theme here in Matthew 24, but the blessing in view here is for “doing”, actually providing nourishment for the household. Again we see the parallel between watching and doing. Watching can never be an academic interest in Bible prophecies. It has to be active, or else it isn’t ‘watching’ in the sense intended.</p><p><em>Whom his lord when he comes shall find so doing…</em>-</p><p> Again we find emphasized the eternal importance of our attitude of mind at the moment of the Lord’s coming. Those who want to go to the Lord are confirmed in their desire by being snatched away to meet Him, whereas those who don’t have that immediacy of desire will be left behind, to be forcibly gathered to Him later.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:47'>Mat 24:47</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Truly I say to you, that he will set him over all that he has</em>-</p><p> See on :45&nbsp;<em>Has made ruler</em>. If we are doing what we have been empowered to do for the household now, then we shall be appointed to eternally do this:&nbsp;</p><p>The state of perfection in the Kingdom is described as us (the complete church of all ages) having reached, "a perfect man... the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ", having grown up into Christ, who is the head of the body (<em><a href='B:560 4:13'>Eph 4:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 4:15'>Eph 4:15</a></em>). When Christ comes, we will each individually be made ruler over&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;that He has, we will each individually be fully righteous, fully manifesting the Lord Jesus. There seems to be marked connection with the fact (brought out in the parable of the talents) that we will each have&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;the Master's goods, and the description in the next parable of those goods being distributed between us in this life (<em><a href='B:470 24:47'>Mat 24:47</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:15'>Mat 25:15</a></em>). In the Kingdom we will no longer know partially, as a result of seeing parts of the whole picture; we will see face to face (<em><a href='B:530 13:9'>1Co 13:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 13:12'>1Co 13:12</a></em> Gk:).</p><p>In this life, the servant was ‘made ruler over’ s:w. the household, his job was to feed his fellow servants. If he is found so doing at the Lord’s return, he will be made ruler over literally all that his master owns, “all his goods” (AV) is literally ‘all that He has’. This is a profound insight into the nature of eternity. All that God has will be put under us. God has not subjected the world to come to the Angels but to us (<em><a href='B:650 2:5'>Heb 2:5</a></em>). This is because “all things” are to be put in subjection under the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:650 2:8'>Heb 2:8</a></em>), and all that is true of Him is true of us. But that being part of Him is dependent upon our serving of our brethren within the household. See on :43&nbsp;<em>The householder-&nbsp;</em>He is the householder, but we also are, because we are in Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:470 24:48'>Mat 24:48</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But if that evil servant</em>-</p><p> The next parable likewise features two types of servant; the “faithful” servant s:w:, and the equivalent of this “evil servant” is the “wicked and lazy servant… the unprofitable servant” (<em><a href='B:470 25:26'>Mat 25:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:30'>Mat 25:30</a></em>). That servant who did nothing is paralleled with the servant who proactively got drunk, thought his Lord delayed, and beat his brethren. Despite all that bad behaviour, the real issue was that he did nothing positive for his Lord. So often, the fellow servants are effectively beaten because of the sins of omission, inaction, refusal to stand up for the abused:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Shall say in his heart</em>-</p><p> The Bible knows nothing of a personal, cosmic Satan. Rather the real adversary is presented as the human heart, and therefore a huge amount of attention is given to the state of the human heart and the significance of our self-talk. Nobody consciously says ‘The Lord is delaying, great, now I can drink and abuse my brethren’. But the Lord puts His finger on the self-talk that goes on in our deep subconscious, and He does so in the context of warning against having a specific date in mind for the second coming.</p><p><em>My Lord's coming</em>-</p><p> There is no turning to atheism or rebellion against the Lord, but rather the root cause of the misbehaviour is placed by the parable upon the man’s mentality that because he knows the date of his Lord’s coming, he can just ensure he’s behaving properly when He comes. And this is the purpose of the parable- to challenge that idea and explain why the date must be left unknown by us. This is the same idea as the foolish virgins not taking oil with them in the next parable. The idea is simply that the foolish take no oil because they are certain they know the day and hour of the bridegroom’s coming; whereas the wise recognize that they do not know the exact day and hour, and therefore act accordingly by taking more oil in case there is a delay. This is exactly the point being made in the Lord’s teaching at the end of chapter 24. Those who are convinced they know the day and hour, for whom the idea of flexibility or delay in the Lord’s purpose is anathema, are in fact those who fall asleep and are caught unprepared.</p><p><em>Is delayed</em>-</p><p> The Lord Jesus / bridegroom “tarries” (<em><a href='B:470 25:5'>Mat 25:5</a></em>), the same Greek word translated ‘delay’ in “my Lord delays His coming”. The Lord&nbsp;<em>does&nbsp;</em>delay His coming- the man’s mistake was in acting inappropriately because of this. God’s judgments likewise “waited”, or delayed, in Noah’s time (<em><a href='B:670 3:20'>1Pe 3:20</a></em>)- presumably for the 120 year period of <em><a href='B:10 6:3'>Gen 6:3</a></em>. In a similar way, the judgment on Nineveh preached by Jonah also delayed- it came in the end, but their repentance meant that it delayed at that time:&nbsp;In the first century, all things were ready for the Supper- supper time had come. But the start of the supper has been delayed 2000 years by Israel’s rejection of the invitation to participate (<em><a href='B:490 14:17'>Luk 14:17</a></em>). The evil servant misbehaved because he thought the Lord had delayed and therefore he could misbehave, so long as he got his act together at the time of the Lord’s coming. This parable is therefore an explanation of why we must recognize that we don’t know the date of the Lord’s return; if we do think we know it, then this will lead us into misbehaviour. Those with a determinate, black and white view of God and His prophetic style have often shown us the truth of this parable. They thought the Lord would return at a certain date, or once certain conditions had been fulfilled. These things happened, and the Lord didn’t come- and their behaviour went seriously downhill:&nbsp;</p><p>Moses' sprinkling of Israel with blood and then going away for forty days (the period of probation), returning after a perceived delay to a people lost in revelry with only a faithful minority, must point forward to our Lord's ascension to the Father's presence after the blood sprinkling of the cross, and His subsequent return. Christ's words of <em><a href='B:470 24:48'>Mat 24:48</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:50'>Mat 24:50</a></em> suggest he read this incident along these lines: "That evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming (cp. "Where is the promise of his coming?" and the people feeling Moses had delayed to return); and shall begin to... eat and drink with the drunken (cp. "the people sat down to eat and drink", <em><a href='B:530 10:7'>1Co 10:7</a></em>); the Lord of that servant shall come... in an hour that he is not aware of, and shall cut him asunder" - recalling the Levite's sudden massacre of the people on Moses' return. If the return of Moses from the mount is indeed typical of the second coming, then it would follow that the majority of the new Israel will be unprepared at the Lord's return also.</p><p>"The Lord (Jesus- v:15,18) is not slack concerning his promise (to return- of <em><a href='B:500 14:3'>Joh 14:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 14:18'>Joh 14:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 14:28'>Joh 14:28</a></em>), as some men (in the ecclesia) count slackness”, but is longsuffering (<em><a href='B:680 3:9'>2Pe 3:9</a></em>). The Greek for "slack" here means 'delay'; this is assurance that God is not 'delaying' as men dilly-dally in the execution of their plans, but is rather postponing this for a good reason. There’s an allusion here to <em><a href='B:290 30:17-19'>Isa 30:17-19</a></em>, which records how Israel would suffer for their sins, but then God would wait for a certain time until they cried to Him in repentance, before bringing about a time of blessing on the earth based around the Lord's presence in Jerusalem: "One thousand shall flee at the rebuke of one (Deuteronomy 28 language)... till ye be left as a tree bereft of branches (how Paul describes what happened to Israel in the first century, Romans 11)... and therefore (i:e. because you are such sinners) will the Lord wait, that He may be gracious unto you, and therefore will He be exalted (through your repentance), that He may have mercy upon you: for the Lord is a God of judgment: blessed are all they that wait for Him. For the people shall dwell in Zion at Jerusalem: thou shalt weep no more (the language of <em><a href='B:290 65:17-25'>Isa 65:17-25</a></em>, quoted in <em><a href='B:680 3:13'>2Pe 3:13</a></em>): He will be very gracious unto thee at the voice of thy cry (of repentance):&nbsp;<em>when</em>&nbsp;He shall hear it, He will answer thee". Not only is God delaying the Kingdom until there is repentance in Israel, but such is His&nbsp;<em>mercy&nbsp;</em>that He will not bring it about until such repentance. His purpose should not be seen, therefore, just in terms of the cold equation 'Repentance in Israel= second coming', but the supreme&nbsp;<em>mercy</em>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<em>love&nbsp;</em>which this arrangement shows should be appreciated. "And&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;will He be exalted" Isaiah comments- by those who understand these things. <em><a href='B:520 11:32-36'>Rom 11:32-36</a></em> is a marvellous example of this.</p>


text:
<p>24:49&nbsp;<em>And shall begin</em>-</p><p> The idea is that only soon after he has begun his misbehaviour, the Lord comes. This highlights the point that because the man was sure that he knew the exact time of the Lord’s coming, and that time was not right now,&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;he did these bad things. The whole point of the parable is to explain&nbsp;<em>why</em>&nbsp;we do not and should not ever think we know the date of His coming. For it is this which is portrayed in the parable as the root reason why he begins beating the fellow servants and being self-indulgent, mixing with the unbelievers rather than the believers.</p><p><em>To beat his fellow servants-&nbsp;</em>Smiting the fellow servants is related to keeping other company- with the drunken. It could be that this parable is intended to have a specific latter day fulfilment, in that it speaks of the last few days or little while before the Lord’s return. For the evil servant has only just begun to beat, eat and drink, when his Lord comes. The ‘smiting’ might suggest that the evil servant joins in the persecution of the Lord’s servants which will be ongoing in that final period of tribulation:&nbsp;</p><p>The idea of the steward of the house smiting the fellow servant (<em><a href='B:470 24:49'>Mat 24:49</a></em>) is referred to by Paul (in the Greek text) in <em><a href='B:530 8:12'>1Co 8:12</a></em>, concerning&nbsp;<em>wounding</em>&nbsp;the conscience of weak brethren. Paul's vision of the latter day ecclesia was therefore that materialistic elders would act with no thought as to their effect on the consciences of the flock, and thereby many would stumble. The Lord’s only other reference to fellow servants is in 18:28-33, where the deeply indebted servant ‘beat’ a fellow servant who owed him a relatively small amount. The beating of the fellow servants may therefore be intended to be understood in terms of refusing to forgive, and demanding what is due.</p>&nbsp;</p><p><p><em>And shall eat and drink with the drunkards</em>-</p><p> His duty was to feed his fellow servants, but instead he became obsessed with feeding himself. The Lord has just spoken of ‘eating and drinking’ as characterizing Noah’s world (:38)- and also Lot’s world (<em><a href='B:490 17:28'>Luk 17:28</a></em>). There’s nothing wrong with any of the things Noah’s world were doing in themselves, but they were indulged in to the point of obsession. The man called to go in to the ark and care for those within it had instead gone outside into the world and engaged with them in their way of life. The next verse continues allusions to Noah’s time.</p><p><em><a href='B:490 12:45'>Luk 12:45</a></em> adds that the man himself becomes drunk; he is influenced by the company he now keeps. <em><a href='B:470 24:49'>Mat 24:49</a></em> is alluded to in <em><a href='B:590 5:3-7'>1Th 5:3-7</a></em>, where the picture is graphically created of a man who has been hard drinking for a whole evening, now at home stupefied, late at night. It is then that the thief comes; whilst dimly aware of his coming, the man is quite unprepared to meet him and keep his (spiritual) house intact. This will be the tragic position of those who through belief and practice are unready for their Lord. It seems that a materialistic eldership, uncommitted to the real needs of the household, indifferent to guarding the house, will contribute to our latter day apostasy as a community. And note the correspondence between those who are harsh on their brethren being those who are also caught up in the things of the world. The drunken servant starts to beat the fellow servants, using a Greek word which means to punish (<em><a href='B:490 12:45'>Luk 12:45</a></em>). This creates the picture of a worldly ecclesial elder over-disciplining others. No wonder there will be so much friction and disunity amongst spiritual Israel of the last days.</p>


