125. Chapter 12 - The Second Coming

Chapter 12 - The Second Coming Matthew 24:29-51;Matthew 25:1-46;Mark 13:24-37;Luke 21:25-31,Luke 21:34-36 The Two Questions

One of the most perplexing features of the predictions recorded in Matthew 24:1-51 and the parallel passages is the fact that two questions are being answered, and it is very difficult to determine when the transition is made from the destruction of Jerusalem to the second coming. In this respect, there is a similarity to the Messianic predictions of the Old Testament which do not clearly state that there are to be two comings: the one, to save; the other, to judge. The politically minded Jews seized upon the passages depicting the Christ coming in glory on the clouds of heaven, and passed over the passages which told of His coming humbly to suffer and die for the sins of mankind. The spiritually minded Jews naturally studied with more reverent interest the passages which represented the Christ as a suffering Servant. The prophecies were evidently veiled in this fashion to allow Christ to reveal Himself when He came, and at the same time to stimulate the constant study and interest of the people of God during the intervening centuries.

Earlier Instruction

Gould claims that Jesus could not have talked now with His disciples about His second coming because He had not spoken of it before, and they did not understand about it. He holds their failure to understand about the death and resurrection of Jesus to be incredible if they had known about the second coming. Thus do the radicals who attempt to cut up the Gospel narratives and throw away what interferes with their theories, find themselves continually forced to use multiplied acts of violence to support their original rejection. The disciples had understood so clearly the prediction of Jesus concerning His death made many months before at Caesarea Philippi, that they were horrified and thrown into despair. By the time of the journey to Jerusalem at the resurrection of Lazarus, they were in the desperate mood to agree with Thomas: “Let us also go, that we may die with him.” During these last days they could think of nothing else. The fact that they did not understand the predictions of Jesus concerning His resurrection does not prove that they did not see the glimmer of light offered by His repeated promises to return again in glory. Their blindness toward His declarations about His resurrection would cause them to concentrate feverishly upon the promises of His second coming. It is for this very reason and out of such a background that they excitedly seek information about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the relation of this event to the second coming. Jesus had continually talked with His disciples about His second coming. One parable after another had been built around the fact that He was to leave and then come again: Luke 19:11 is a good illustration; Matthew 13:40-47; Matthew 16:27; Matthew 20:21 are further examples.

Those Days

It seems clear that Matthew 24:22 marks the beginning of a transition section in the discourse as Jesus turns from the discussion of the first question, as to when Jerusalem shall be destroyed, to the consideration of the second coming. Matthew 24:21 carries an atmosphere of finality: “For then shall be great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever shall be.” The chief difficulty is to determine what is meant by the phrase, “those days,” in the following verses. Those who would interpret “those days” to mean the crisis leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem face three difficulties: (1) The rest of the paragraph is then a repetition of the declarations of appearance of false Christs preceding the destruction of Jerusalem, as in Matthew 24:5, Matthew 24:11; (2) The statement “no flesh would have been saved” must be taken in a limited sense since the continuation of the siege of Jerusalem could hardly have been expected to carry its destructive impact outside of Judaea where both Jews and Christians living in that section of the world might have been swept to general destruction; (3) the relation of “those days” to the second coming by the word “immediately” in Matthew 24:29 compels the understanding of this word in a very general sense, if the period described by “those days” means the crisis leading to the fall of Jerusalem. In fact, this verse is one which radicals leap upon to make their charge that Jesus expected to return immediately or that the apostles expected Him to return in their lifetime and concocted this speech to support their expectation. The Times of the Gentiles The accounts of Mark and Luke give decisive information in the solution of this difficulty. Luke 21:24 reads: “and they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all the nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” Thus Luke couples with his closing statement of what Jesus said concerning the horrors of the final siege of Jerusalem, the added declaration of Jesus that the fall of the city is to be followed by an indefinite period which is to be distinguished by the fact that the city is to be “trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” It is a most remarkable fact that the city has never been in the hands of the Jews until this day. The fleeting effort of Bar Cochebas to reestablish Jewish dominance ended in the final debacle of a.d. 132-4, and can hardly figure in this estimate. Not even the fiercely fighting forces of Israeli today were able to drive the Arabs, entrenched behind their barbed-wire entanglements, from the old walled city of Jerusalem, and the UN stepped in to make the city an international city, which still fits the description of its being trodden down by the Gentiles and not under Jewish control. If the Jews should manage to secure control of Jerusalem and make it their capital as they declare they will do in defiance of the UN, it would be enough to make one wonder if the times of the Gentiles have been fulfilled. But there is no such military event in prospect at the present time. Luke relates the second coming to this indefinite period which is to follow the fall of Jerusalem.

Mark adds the important item that Jesus used the term “those days” in this part of His address with the explanatory statement that He meant a period following the fall of Jerusalem: “But in those days, after that tribulation” (Mark 13:24). A study of the three accounts makes evident that the writers are giving independent summations of what was evidently a much longer discourse by Jesus. It is most interesting to note that Luke, who gives the very definite description of the period following the fall of Jerusalem as a time when the city will be trodden down of the Gentiles, does not say that “the second coming” will follow “immediately” after the end of this period, while Matthew who uses the term “immediately,” connects it with the altogether indefinite phrase “those days.” Thus the report of neither violates the key statement of Jesus concerning His second coming: “But of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only” (Matthew 24:36). The fact that the translators of both the Authorized and American Standard Versions did not end the paragraph at Matthew 24:21, but continued on to Matthew 24:28, shows that they thought these verses (Matthew 24:22-28) should be read and interpreted with the preceding, rather than the succeeding context, or in a paragraph by themselves. It is clear, however, that we have here a transition in the discourse, for Jesus speaks plainly in Matthew 24:27 of his second coming: “For as the lightning cometh forth from the east, and is seen even unto the west; so shall be the coming of the Son of man.” This immediately forces us to retrace our steps and ask: “Just where did Jesus change over from discussion of the fall of Jerusalem to the answer to their second question as to His second coming?” The term “those days” is so indefinite that it can refer either to the crisis leading up to the fall of Jerusalem or the period following it. If, as both Mark and Luke indicate clearly, it refers to the period between the fall of Jerusalem and the second coming, then all the difficulties in this section are cleared up at once. The prediction of the rise of false Christs is not a repetition of what He has just said in Matthew 24:5 and Matthew 24:11, but is a warning that in the period following the fall of Jerusalem, also, many false Christs will arise. History has shown a continual succession of such false Christs even to our own day. Furthermore, in the light of our present desperate world situation the declaration of Jesus concerning “those days” begins to take on new meaning: “Except those days had been shortened, no flesh would have been saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened” (Matthew 24:22). In the present discussions among scientists about the fearful possibilities of wars with atom and hydrogen bombs, we hear scientists, who are utterly irreligious and who know nothing and care less about the Bible, predicting the total annihilation of the human race is in prospect. Is this what Jesus was talking about: “no flesh would have been saved”? The history of interpretation of prophecy which is yet to be fulfilled is so replete with all sorts of fantastic interpretations which men have devised and have attempted dogmatically to force upon others, it is always well to be cautious in affirming certainty of understanding. It should be remembered, however, that the very obscurity which the inspired records maintain in such predictions is calculated to create a constant attitude of expectancy on our part and a persistent examination of the trend of events in history. This is not to say that one is thus attempting to predict the date of the second coming. If “those days” refers to the period between the fall of Jerusalem and the second coming, then the following conclusions are evident from Matthew 24:22 : (1) We should not be frightened at aught that men can do, for God is still in control of the ultimate destiny of the world and can bring it to an end when He will. His heart is full of love for mankind and He is ever striving for their redemption. (2) The state of the world will grow worse, whether progressively or spasmodically; we have already reached a state where it is generally being discussed as to whether mankind can long survive on this planet. Paul’s predictions of how “evil men shall wax worse and worse” and the visions of the book of Revelation envisage the same sort of state of world affairs as time proceeds. (3) God will see to it that man does not perish from the earth in spite of the worst that wicked men may do; God Himself will bring about the end of man’s stay in this world and will, at that time, call all men to judgment. The central proposition which Christ presents in this section is that no man will be able to foretell when His second coming will be. Many false Christs will arise, but the Christian should not be deluded: the second coming will be as the lightning sweeping across the heavens — visible, instantaneous, universal, unpredictable. The Eagles Gathered The enigmatic declaration in Matthew 24:28 has been the subject of immense speculation: “Wheresoever the carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together.” In the present paragraphing of the a.v. and a.s.v. , this statement brings to a close the discussion of the fall of Jerusalem, but it is a discussion which has just been changed over to consideration of the second coming. To which of these, then, should the reader apply this cryptic remark? or does it apply equally to both? It is a curious feature of both translations that the Greek word aetos should be rendered “eagles” instead of “vultures.” It can mean either, but the context plainly shows that it means vultures, soaring, circling, and finally descending upon a dead body which they devour. The theory of the English scholar, Lightfoot, that the golden eagle, mounted on the crest of the banner of Roman legions, was the abomination of desolation, seems to have influenced the a.s.v. translators to retain the word “eagle” here instead of vulture. Some interpreters suggest that the verse refers to the comparison: as the vultures indicate inevitably the presence of a dead body, so the signs Jesus has set forth will enable the Christians to discern the approaching siege of Jerusalem. Others point out that Jesus has just mentioned the second coming in the preceding verse. This final, veiled remark applies equally to the terrible suffering which Jesus has just predicted will precede the fall of Jerusalem and also precede His own return: sin is the carcass which always draws the vultures.

Cosmological Changes

“But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Matthew 24:29, Matthew 24:30). This is the precise point where the reports of Mark and Luke are of so much assistance as they clearly point out that “those days” refers to the indefinite period between the fall of Jerusalem and the second coming. Matthew’s term “immediately” would indicate the instantaneous character of the second coming which has already been affirmed in Matthew 24:27 in comparing it to a bolt of lightning streaking across the sky. The cosmological changes are to be simultaneous with the second coming; they are not signs which precede and will indicate the approach of the event, but are wonderful changes of the face of heaven and earth which will accompany the second coming. The sun and moon will be darkened, and the Son of man will return, all at once. The answer to the second question of the disciples, then, is that there will be signs accompanying the second coming, but none preceding it by which men may predict the time and prepare themselves for a known, assured time. They must be ready at all times, for no man can predict the time. The words of Jesus fit in a wonderful way the nature of the earth and the heavenly bodies, and the suddenness and universality of the second coming: both the sun and the moon will be darkened at once: it is day on part of the earth where the sun is shining, and the moon will be darkened and stars will fall on the part where it is night. It will suddenly become dark on all parts of the earth at once, while the divine brightness of heaven as suddenly shines in the second coming of Christ. If Jesus had predicted the second coming as either in the daytime or the night, it would have contradicted modern scientific knowledge of the world or the universality of the coming. The Sign of the Son of Man

What is “the sign of the Son of man” which shall appear in heaven, but the Son of man Himself as He appears? Certainly no opportunity is to be given to men to change their lives suddenly and prepare for His coming. They must be ready at all times. “The tribes of the earth shall mourn,” and the Christians are to “lift up your heads” in joyous welcome “because your redemption draweth nigh” (Luke 21:28) as all are summoned to the judgment at the second coming. The problem as to how the figurative declarations of the book of Revelation are to be fitted into the predictions of Jesus is the source of the violent Pre-millennial and Post-millennial discussions. Revelation 20:4-10 declares that the martyred saints shall reign with Christ 1,000 years. The A-millennialists deny that there is to be such a reign and maintain that the language of Revelation is purely figurative. Those who hold to this view are not necessarily radicals, for the famous conservative scholar, Dr. Machen, held this view. The Post-millennialists hold that there is to be a golden age of 1,000 years leading up to the second coming, hence the second coming is after the reign of 1,000 years. But this view seems to collide solidly with the prediction throughout the New Testament of the wickedness, the persecution of Christians, the falling away and indifference of many, which will characterize the world in the time preceding the second coming. It certainly does not sound like a “golden age,” but the golden age idea sounds like the theory of evolution — a theory which is having extremely hard going at the present time. It is truly difficult, today, to find any one who claims the world is of necessity growing better. The Pre-millennialists face the difficulty of supposing two second comings: one to summon the righteous to the reign of a thousand years; the other, to call the wicked to judgment at the end of this reign. They emphasize the next verse of Matthew 24:1-51 which says: “And he shall send forth his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other” (Matthew 24:31); with this, they emphasize the statements of Matthew 24:40, Matthew 24:41 that the righteous “one” is taken, and the other is left. But to emphasize these elements too strongly is to overlook the entire force of the closing phase of this discourse which covers the entire Chapter 25 and plainly represents both the righteous and the wicked as being summoned to judgment at once. 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 is also given strong emphasis as indicating that the righteous are to be taken out of the world for a period of 1,000 years before the final judgment. This is to read considerable into the text, however, and it seems better to be content with the promises of God and allow Him to show forth finally the manner of their fulfillment. John affirms in Revelation that there is to be a reign of a thousand years. God will, in His own good time, demonstrate how this is to be fulfilled with regard to the second coming. Not even the most devout Jews at the time of Christ’s birth in Bethlehem understood many Old Testament predictions concerning the nature of His coming and His kingdom. God so veiled the predictions as to allow Christ to reveal Himself and His program: no man could anticipate and announce beforehand His procedure. This should be a warning to us against presumption in arranging all the details of the reign of a thousand years and the second coming. Frequently those who argue so violently about the millennium seem to have little breath left to tell of the glories of heaven. After all, the reign of a thousand years is only a thousand years; heaven is for ever and ever. A Christian does not have to be a Pre-millennialist or a Post-millennialist or an A-millennialist. He can maintain a pro-millennial view and humbly watch and wait for the second coming of Christ to make known to us the meaning of the veiled predictions. The basic fact in this whole discourse of Jesus on the second coming is that no man will be able to predict the time of His coming and every man should keep himself ready at all times, “for in an hour ye think not the Son of man cometh.” Whatever his particular opinion as to details, he should hold fast to this fundamental proposition which resounds as a refrain through the last 61 verses of this sermon covering two chapters. No Prediction of the Time

Once this fact is accepted, it becomes immediately evident that the declarations of Matthew 24:32-34 refer to the destruction of Jerusalem which can be clearly foreseen, and which will occur within the limits of the generation Jesus addressed. At this point we see the superior translation which the Authorized Version offers both as regards the rendering of Matthew 24:33 and the beginning of a new paragraph at Matthew 24:36. This translation plainly affirms that Jesus is discussing in Matthew 24:32-34 the destruction of Jerusalem as an event that can be as certainly foretold as one might observe the approach of summer by the budding of the fig trees. It translates: “So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.” The American Standard Version, on the other hand, translates it in such fashion as to contradict the fundamental proposition of the entire sermon: “Even so ye also, when ye see all these things, know ye that he is nigh, even at the doors.” A marginal reading is given suggesting “it” and showing there was a strong disagreement over the translation among the scholars with the majority vote favoring “he.” The Greek text does not carry the subject of the verb; it must be supplied and may be either “he” or “it” so far as the Greek structure is concerned. The thing which caused the majority of the American Standard translators to favor “he” is evidently the fact that in the immediately preceding context Jesus has been discussing the second coming: there must be some sort of order and logic in this discourse.

Outline of the Sermon The following analysis of the chapter is offered to show that a most effective method of arranging a discussion of two points, is to give a discussion of each in turn, and then to offer a summary of each. This principle applied to Matthew 24:1-51 shows how and why Jesus discussed first the one topic, and then, the other.

Matthew 24:1-51 Jesus — “There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

Disciples — “When shall these things be?” (Destruction of Jerusalem) (Matthew 24:3).

“What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” (Matthew 24:3).

(I) Jesus answers the first question and warns them how to escape the destruction of Jerusalem by fleeing to the mountains when they see the signs (Matthew 24:15-21).

Transition section of the discourse, shifting from the first to the second question (Matthew 24:22-28).

(II) Jesus answers the second question and gives the sign of the second coming which is His appearance on the clouds of heaven simultaneous with vast cosmological changes (Matthew 24:29-31).

(1) Summary of answer to Question I — Signs easily recognized — Watch for them — destruction of Jerusalem to be before the end of that generation (Matthew 24:32-35).

(2) Summary of answer to Question II — Impossible to predict the time of the second coming. Be ready at all times (vv. 36-51).

Further discussion of the second coming and practical application of its certainty and uncertainty (Chapter 25). That Day and Hour

Those who claim to be able to predict the time of the second coming would evade the flat declaration of Jesus in Matthew 24:36, by saying that no man knows the day or the hour, but that he can predict the year! The force of the adversative conjunction “but” is very strong in this verse. The preceding verses state that the signs preceding the destruction of Jerusalem will be identifiable, just as the budding of the fig tree shows the approach of summer, and declare that the fall of Jerusalem will occur within that generation, “but” (on the contrary, so far as the second coming is concerned) “of that day and hour knoweth no one.” No man will be able to foresee and foretell the second coming, for it is not even known to the Son of man, but to God. Proof that the phrase “that day and hour” means “time” is found by comparing Matthew 24:42 with Mark 13:33 : Matthew says: “Ye know not on what day your Lord cometh”; Mark reports: Ye know not when the time is.” A study of the parables with which Jesus illustrates the certainty of His second coming, the uncertainty of the time, and the awful results of being unprepared, in the closing verses of Chapter 24 and all of Chapter 25, will show that the very heart of all these illustrations is found in the fact that men cannot find out the time and get ready at the last minute, but must be ready at all times. If the master of the household could have foreknown when the thief was about to break into the house, he would have given up everything else and prepared to defend his possessions, but he did not know and was robbed. The good steward who was always ready is contrasted with the wicked steward who was found unprepared. Again we see that “day” and “hour” are used in the general sense (Matthew 24:50); as also “even,” “midnight,” “cock-crowing,” or “morning” (Mark 13:35). It is a strange fact that so many Christians instead of occupying themselves with the diligent effort to do the will of Christ, should take the perverse attitude of spending their time trying to figure out and predict the time of His second coming. We do not know why God kept the time of the second coming so secret that the Son, to whom all authority in heaven and on earth was given, did not know this time. But we can see that if Jesus had declared that He knew the time, but would not reveal it, the temptation to read into every statement of Christ some subtle prediction of the time would be compelling. It is plain that Jesus did know that the second coming would not occur until after the end of a period of time following the destruction of Jerusalem and that this destruction would occur in the generation of those living when He made the predictions. It is plain from His parables that there is the continual hint the second coming would be delayed so long that many would give up hope and turn back to the world and many others would scoff at the whole idea. This is a strong feature of many of His parables As we reflect upon this fact, we see the impressive appropriateness of His language in saying He did not know “the day nor the hour.”

Pastor Russell’s Prediction

Pastor Russell, founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses sect, attracted great interest in his preaching in New York City and in his writings during the years preceding the First World War by predicting that the second coming would occur in the year 1914. When the World War exploded upon the civilized world, Pastor Russell shouted in triumph that he had told everyone that 1914 would be the date and here it was approaching but when 1915 rolled around, he had to find some way of escape from his embarrassing dilemma, so he began to say that Jesus really had come, but no one knew it except himself and his select group of followers. He had made too many specific predictions, however, for this dodge to be effective with anyone familiar with his writings, for he had predicted that the rule of all earthly rulers would cease in 1914, that Christ would come and take over control of all the nations, and similar declarations.

Luke’s Account

Luke has several interesting statements peculiar to his account. In describing the amazing changes in the heavens and the earth that shall accompany the second coming, he mentions: “And upon the earth distress of nations, in perplexity for the roaring of the sea and the billows; men fainting for fear, and for expectation of the things which are coming on the world” (Luke 21:25, Luke 21:26). This, however, does not prove that these awesome changes are not to be simultaneous with the second coming. He closes his report of the discourse with this statement: “But watch ye at every season, making supplication, that ye may prevail to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man” (Luke 21:36). There is no indication that the darkening of the sun, moon, stars, and the terrifying storms and roaring of the sea are anything to be escaped in the sense of fleeing to the mountains to escape these cosmological changes. He is rather summing up the whole discussion of the times of trial which shall come upon the earth and cause many to fall away: “But take heed to yourselves, lest haply your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and that day come on you suddenly as a snare” (Luke 21:34). They would not be able “to stand before the Son of man” at His second coming by means of escaping death at the fall of Jerusalem or any other disasters, but by righteous living and faithful service. Luke closes his warning concerning the fall of Jerusalem in Luke 21:24, summarizes this in Luke 21:29-33, and doses his warning concerning the second coming in Luke 21:28, and his summary in Luke 21:34. The Times of the Gentiles

Luke, who is the clearest in his specification that the second coming is not to occur at the time of the fall of Jerusalem, but is to be separated from it by a period during which “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled,” is also emphatic in his report that the fall of Jerusalem will not mean the downfall of the church, but rather its greater triumph. At the point where the Authorized and the American Standard Versions part company as to whether the texts of Matthew 24:33 and Mark 13:29 should read “he is nigh” (second coming) or “it is nigh” (destruction of Jerusalem), Luke introduces a new element by reporting: “Even so ye also, when ye see these things coming to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh” (Luke 21:31). John the Baptist reported that the kingdom of heaven was at hand when the Messiah was about to begin His ministry. Now that the church had been established at the day of Pentecost, the kingdom coming nigh after the destruction of Jerusalem must refer to a new phase of growth and power in the kingdom. When the disciples had been assured that the destruction of Jerusalem would occur in their generation, but that the second coming would not be until after the times of the Gentiles had been fulfilled, then the natural question in their minds would be as to the result upon the church of the destruction of the temple and the holy city. Would this mean likewise the subjugation and desolation of the church? Evidently at this point in His discussion Jesus introduced light upon this phase of the problem which Luke records in the clause “the kingdom of God is nigh.”

Plummer holds that these words of Luke refer to the destruction of Jerusalem, but it seems clear that the language used shows that Jesus said something which showed the relation and effect of the destruction of Jerusalem as regards the church. In his comments on Luke 9:27 where Christ affirms: “There are some of them that stand here, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the kingdom of God” (Mark 9:1 “the kingdom of God come with power”), Plummer cites the similarity with Luke 21:31 and urges that it refers to the destruction of Jerusalem. “The exceptional privilege of some, as distinct from the common experience of all” is the key which he draws from the phrase: “some of them that stand here.” Judas, however, did not survive until the establishment of the kingdom on the day of Pentecost and the reference of Luke 9:27 may be to this event.) Plummer argues: “The destruction of Jerusalem, witnessed by St. John and perhaps a few others of those present, swept away the remains of the Old Dispensation and left the gospel in possession of the field. Only so far as the destruction of Jerusalem was a type of the end of the world is there a reference to the parousia. A direct reference to the parousia is excluded by the fact that none of those present lived to witness it, except in the sense that all men will witness it. Jesus has told us that during His life on earth He was ignorant of the date of the day of judgment (Mark 13:32): and we cannot suppose that in spite of that ignorance He predicted it was near; still less that He uttered a prediction which has not been fulfilled. Moreover, the “shall not taste of death until’ implies that the “some’ will experience death after seeing the kingdom of God which will not be true of those who live to see the parousia (1 Corinthians 15:51).” (Plummer, Commentary on Luke, pp. 250, 485).

Radical Attacks

Modernists generally hold that the Synoptics were written after the fall of Jerusalem and these predictions either were invented completely or highly colored by a knowledge of the events supposed to be predicted. They hold in regard to the second coming either (1) that Jesus expected to return immediately and was mistaken in this as He predicted an immediate return, or (2) that Jesus did not expect or predict any visible return to the world at some definite time, but only predicted a spiritual entering into the affairs of the world. Against the first position, it should be noted (1) The Gospel of John, which all agree was written after the fall of Jerusalem, does not attempt to report or to elaborate upon these predictions. Since they had already been reported thrice, they already served their purpose in assisting the escape from Jerusalem of the early Christians and had been recorded for future generations as evidence of the miraculous foresight of Jesus. John had additional evidence, as yet unrecorded, given by Jesus on other occasions, which he desired to record. (2) The silence of Matthew, Mark, and Luke as to the actual fulfillment of these predictions would have been inexplicable, if written after the events. (3) The obscure character of the predictions recorded from the lips of Jesus would have been made more definite by inventors with the actual history before them. (4) The evident, urgent purpose of narratives is to assist the Christians in anticipating and escaping the fall of Jerusalem, and in maintaining an urgent expectation of the second coming. A group of radical critics (Weizsacker, Wendt, Vischer, Weiffenback, among others) hold that since Jesus was no more than a mere man, He could not have predicted such a thing as His return in glory to judge the world. Since they think this would have made Him a hopeless fanatic, they undertake to argue that this chapter was copied into the text from some Jewish or Jewish-Christian apocalypse. Daniel had predicted this centuries before, but it seems preferable to these critics to deny the possibility of prediction and to make out that these are mere inventions of some anonymous writer of the Maccabean period. Keim held that the discourse of Matthew 24:1-51 has been expanded from some genuine sayings of Jesus. He was willing to admit that Jesus had said some of the things attributed to Him. He was able to see that Mark 13:32 (“no man knoweth the day”) never could have been invented and put into the mouth of Jesus because it declares such an astounding limitation to His knowledge. Even Schmiedel made this one of his “Pillar Passages” which he would admit had been spoken by Jesus.

Reply to Radical Attack

It may be replied to this whole group that the theory of a Jewish-Christian apocalypse is purely imaginary, like the rest of the “sources” the radicals conjure up to assist them in dissecting the historical narratives of the New Testament. Plummer replies ably to the entire group, showing how the Gospel accounts are lined throughout with statements of Jesus concerning His second coming (Luke 11:49-51; Luke 13:23-27, Luke 13:35; Luke 17:23-37; Luke 18:8; Luke 19:15, Luke 19:23; Luke 20:16; Matthew 7:22; Matthew 10:23; Matthew 19:28; Matthew 21:44; Matthew 22:7; Matthew 24:31; Matthew 26:64). Particularly notable is the fact that the central declaration of Jesus at His trial before the high priest, Caiaphas, upon the basis of which He was condemned to death, presents the basic proposition of His second coming (Matthew 26:64). Plummer says: “That all three (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) derived their utterances from Apostolic tradition is credible. Is it credible that a writing otherwise unknown and by an unknown author should have had such an enormous influence? And its influence does not end with the three evangelists. It has contributed largely to the Epistle of St. Paul.” The Gospel of John and the book of Revelation also add their continuous and powerful testimony to the fact that Jesus predicted His second coming.

Effect on the Apostles The effect of this discourse upon the apostles, torn between despair and hope, surrounded by deadly peril, and full of perplexity, must have been profound. They had begun their questioning with an air of wistful regret at the prospect of the destruction of such magnificent buildings; they are now led to contemplate the indescribable glories of heaven. They had been oppressed with the thought of the uncertainty of life. They are now led to see that the permanence of man’s mighty achievements in building is but a fleeting shadow; it is the Word of Christ which is sure and unshaken when the heavens and the earth pass away; it is Christ, Himself, who shall return and bring all men to judgment, no matter how great their present power and how flagrant their wickedness. Chadwick, in his commentary on Mark, has a fine discussion of this element of the discourse which he entitles: “Things Perishing and Stable.” The apostles, faced with the appalling imminence of the death of Jesus and with the ominous chain of tragic circumstances daily confirming their worst fears, must have found in this discourse much to rescue them from doubt and despair. It was submerged by the swift, terrifying march of events in the next few hours, but how triumphantly it would resurge in the glorious days following the resurrection. This day which began with the withering of the fig tree and its implications of the destruction of the city and the unlimited scope of His own power, closes now with this amazing revelation of both fearful destruction, and final, ineffable glory. The Day of Glory

Meditating upon the statement of Luke 21:36, the thrilling nature of the consummation comes before us: “Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.” The war is over. The final victory has been won. The great Commander stands up to review His gallant heroes of the battlefield as they march by. Out of great tribulation, persecution, and suffering they come. On their bodies they bear the marks of the Lord Jesus. But their heads are lifted high and they sing in joyous acclaim the glories of the Lamb of God who has redeemed them by His blood. What a day of triumph that will be for those who have withstood the false lures of the world and the cares of this life and are “accounted worthy...to stand before the Son of man.”