Thursday, July 26, 2007

Matthew 24

One of the most misunderstood passages is Jesus Big Prophecy in Matthew 24, sometimes known as the Olivet discourse (there are parallel accounts in Mark 13 and Luke 21). Most people assume that this passage gives a number of signs of the second coming of Jesus. This is not true. Verses 1-35 are actually a warning of the destruction of Jerusalem. Jesus was giving a strong warning to the Jews of what would happen to them, if they rejected him. Only at the end of the passage is the second coming described, and here no signs are given.

The message of Matthew 24 was prompted by Jesus warning that the grandeur of Jerusalem would be destroyed (Matt 24:2). Later the disciples came to Jesus with two questions:

    1. When will these things be (the destruction of Jerusalem)?
    2. What will be the sign of your coming (parousia), and the end of the age?
The disciples thought this was just one question, because they had assumed that these events would come at the same time. They believed that the destruction of Jerusalem would come at the second coming of Jesus. He had already taught them about the day of judgment which would follow his coming at the end of the age. When they heard him speak of judgment against Jerusalem, they assumed that it would come at the end of the age. They could not imagine a world without the Temple of Jerusalem, and assumed that the destruction of the Temple, must mean the end of the world. They wanted to know both the sign and the time of these events.

Whatever the confusion of the disciples, Jesus makes it clear that the destruction of Jerusalem is different from the second coming and the end of the age. He treats their question in two parts. Firstly, he gives the sign and the time of the destruction of Jerusalem (question 1). Then he speaks of the sign and the time of the second coming (question 2). Matthew 24 has two parts. Verses 4-35 deal with the destruction of Jerusalem. Verses 36-51 deal with the second coming and the end of the age.

Read more....

1 comment:

Steve Scott said...

Bad eschatology existed back then, too.