We’re stepping into the 20th century:

“Yet, in spite of persecution from without, and unfaithfulness within, the Gospel continues to spread, until the whole inhabited world is reached and it becomes a testimony to all the nations. That is, as in the case of the martyrdom of Stephen (Acts viii. 1-4), persecution would help to spread the Gospel. The martyrs would be preachers in councils and courts to audiences that would otherwise not easily be reached; and the flight of Christians from one city to another would lead to still greater dissemination of the word.”

And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.    
(Acts 8:1; KJV)

Notice that it’s all past tense, as in: it’s all happened already.

“‘And then shall the end come’ (14). These words are in neither Mk. nor Lk. Indeed, hardly anything in vv. 10-14 is common to Mt. and Lk., and very little is common to Mt. and Mk. ‘The end’ of course means the end of the age, and in interpreting that we must remember the subject of this discourse and the persons to whom it is addressed. Our Lord is speaking of the overthrow of Jerusalem and of the Temple to men who would inevitably think of such an overthrow as the end of the age. It is quite possible that they would regard the destruction of the Holy City and of the Temple-worship as the end of the world. It is quite possible that the Evangelist would so understand it, for he could have no expectation of an interval of many centuries between the Ascension and the Return. But the fact, if it be a fact, that the Apostles and the Evangelist understood the Messiah’s words in this sense is no proof that this was the sense in which He uttered them. What was important for them to know was that the Temple was doomed and its end near. Whether its end would coincide with the end of the world would be taught by experience.”              [from EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. MATTHEW,  by Alfred Plummer, 1909]  

Plummer allows no quarter to those who may think that “the end” is anything more than “the end of the Temple and Jerusalem.” He even goes so far as to suggest that if the Apostles, for example Matthew, were thinking that it meant something more, then they were misunderstanding Jesus’ words.

Then there is the statement: “These words are in neither Mk. nor Lk. Indeed, hardly anything in vv. 10-14 is common to Mt. and Lk., and very little is common to Mt. and Mk.” This isn’t really true. Let’s review the convenient table from John Calvin’s book that we looked at in an earlier post by boiling down the points made in each Gospel:

1. Matthew 24:10 — many will be offended and will deliver up one another and hate one another; Mark 13:12 — brother will deliver up brother to death, and the father the son…; Luke 21:16 — you will be delivered up by parents, and brothers, and relatives, and some of you they will put to death.
2. Matthew 24:11 — And many false prophets will arise and deceive many; Mark 13:22 — false prophets will arise and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect; nothing in Luke.
3. Matthew 24:12 — iniquity will abound, the love of many will be cooled; Mark 13:13 — you will be hated by all men; Luke 21:17 — you will be hated by all
4. Matthew 24:13 — he who perseveres to the end will be saved; Mark 13:13 — he that endures to the end will be saved;  Luke 21:18 — not a hair of your head will be lost.
5. Matthew 24:14 — the Gospel will be preached throughout the whole world for a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come;  Mark 13:10 — the Gospel must first be preached among all nations, 13:9 — you will be brought before rulers and kings for a testimony to them; Luke 21:13 — it will happen to you for a testimony

You can see that not all of Matthew’s points are hit, especially in Luke, but I wouldn’t say that “hardly anything is common” between them. Clearly much is common between them.

“End of the world…The reply of Jesus as given in the Synoptic Gospels is probably the most difficult portion of the Gospels to explain. It is the longest discourse given in Mark. All sorts of problems are raised by it, whether the Gospels have incorporated a Jewish apocalypse at this point, whether the Gospels have put into one great discourse much that Jesus said on various occasions, how the apocalyptic imagery is to be understood, how the various topics are to be distinguished. The subject is too large for extensive treatment here. In general it may be said that it seems appropriate and probable that Jesus on this occasion delivered such a discourse just before his death and after the final break with the rulers. It is improbable that the Gospels would incorporate into the words of Jesus a Jewish apocalypse. Jesus himself on various occasions had spoken of the eschatological side of the kingdom. It is not unlikely that some of those sayings should be repeated at this time (cf. Lk. 12:29-46; 17:26-35).”

²⁹And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink, neither be ye of doubtful mind. ³⁰For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things. ³¹But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you…³⁴For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also…³⁷Blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them…⁴⁰Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of man cometh at an hour when ye think not…  
(Luke 12:29-31,34,37,40; KJV)

²⁶And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. ²⁷They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. ²⁸Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; ²⁹But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. ³⁰Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.  (Luke 17:26-30; KJV)

I find it interesting that in a commentary on Matthew, the author should claim that the Olivet Discourse is “too large for extensive treatment.” The author confines himself to stating the obvious: that it’s likely that Jesus did have this discussion with His Apostles, and it’s probably not a Jewish Apocalypse.

“Inasmuch as several subjects are raised in the query of the disciples, they are treated more or less together in the reply of Jesus. He may not have kept them separate. They are certainly blended in the report. It is not possible always to separate them. In one sense the destruction of Jerusalem was a coming of Christ with power and was a symbol of the judgment at the end of the world. The first part of the discourse mainly refers to the destruction of Jerusalem; the last part is wholly about the end of the world and the second coming; the middle portion is now about one and now about the other. It may be said further that Jesus used the current apocalyptic language (cf. Daniel, Ezekiel, and the Jewish apocalypses like Baruch, Enoch, etc.) in order to be understood. But his language is free from the gross and materialistic ideas in some of the Jewish apocalypses of the time.  Jesus spiritualized the language of the time and used it for a moral purpose.  He wishes to warn the disciples and early Christians and urge them to holy living. As in all apocalyptic language, it is highly figurative and not meant to be taken in literal detail. A general and tentative analysis of the discourse is all that can be here attempted.”

First of all, Jesus took the Apostles’ questions as an opportunity to give them a picture of the future. He had already predicted that the Temple would be destroyed; He obviously had no intention of telling them when these things would happen. Instead, He gave them the signs of the times…the end times. Many of these signs have happened over the centuries, but He was describing a confluence of signs: a confluence that hasn’t quite happened yet. In my opinion, in Matthew, Jesus is not talking about the Temple after 24:2. Mark and Luke are different stories, but we aren’t focusing on them at this time. 

You may recall that in an earlier post E. W. Bullinger made a direct comparison between Matthew’s Olivet Discourse and Revelation. I would say that that is a very big clue that we are not looking at predictions of 70 AD here. As we get back to Revelation (I can’t wait…), I hope to draw more of those comparisons as we reach the relevant parts of Revelation.

Another issue here is that despite having said that it was “improbable that the Gospels would incorporate into the words of Jesus a Jewish apocalypse” the author goes on to declare the use of “apocalyptic language” and that it shouldn’t be “taken in literal detail.” No wonder the author finds this too big a topic for his commentary to handle: he is saying that much of this is symbolic so if he starts theorizing about what symbolizes what, it will take too much space. Better to sum it up as “He wishes to warn the disciples and early Christians and urge them to holy living;” which gives away some of his theology. Christ did not come to this earth to “urge” people to “holy living.” The only thing Christ wanted us to “do” was to follow Him, letting Him into our hearts, so that He could dwell in each of us as in a temple. Because of this, Christ Himself provides the “holy living.”

“End of the world. Jesus answers the disciples’ last question first. He warns them against false Christs and false prophets with programmes and dates. The Gospel must first be proclaimed in the whole world and many troubles will come. It is important to remember this distinct statement, for some even say that Jesus himself expected to come back right away. He manifestly cannot mean that in view of vss. 4-14. Jesus here presupposes the current belief in the two ages — ‘this age’ and ‘the coming age.’ The former would end (be consummated), the latter begin, at the triumph of the Messiah.

“And then shall the end come. This ‘then’ in Matthew is a very vague note of time, but it will be ‘not yet’ (vs. 6).”                [from COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW, by A. T. Robertson, 1911] 

If “some even say that Jesus himself expected to come back right away” then they are/were just wrong. Jesus Himself said that He did not know when He would return, and I doubt He even speculated about it to Himself because it was in His Father’s hands.

Robertson speaks of “the current belief in the two ages” as if this is a given fact. To me, there are more than two ages. Dispensationalists often break up the Old Testament into several dispensations; this is not a make or break issue for me. But, what is make or break for me, is that Christ started a new age at His Resurrection, and will end it with His Second Coming. His Second Coming will start another new age: the millennium. Robertson is skipping over the millennial age apparently.

“The conditions depicted in verses 9 to 14 fit perfectly with the first half of the unfulfilled seventieth week of Daniel; and there fore it is quite possible that the Rapture should be fitted in between verses 8 and 9. On the other hand, similar conditions have taken place again and again during the so-called Christian centuries, but they will be accentuated in the time of the end.”

⁸All these are the beginning of sorrows. ⁹Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake.   (Matthew 24:8,9; KJV)

It’s a nice thought that we should be raptured up between verses 8 and 9, but there are already many being delivered up to affliction and persecution in His Name all over the world. There are even early signs of it in the Land of the Free. While I trust that Jesus will collect us up before the first seal is broken, there is no telling how many of the early signs we will have to endure.

“‘Ye shall be hated of all men for My name’s sake.’ The martyrdom of the saints, first under pagan rule, then under Papal Rome, and later under various other evil systems, is not to be ignored when considering this prophecy. Martyrdom will not cease when the Church of God is caught away. Then the Lord will call out to a new testimony when He takes Israel up once more; and many of His witnesses, in those dark days, will be called upon to lay down their lives during the reign of the Imperial atheistic Beast-power of the last days and his satellite, the personal Antichrist. So that these predictions will have a double fulfillment — during the present age of grace, and in the coming period of judgment.”

This commentary was published in 1948, so the writing probably took place during World War II. This could explain the author’s notation of a “double fulfillment.”  Many people saw that time as the beginning of Tribulation, with Hitler as the Antichrist. It appeared that the whole world was involved (World War…), but the true meaning of “the whole world” is only now coming into focus, and the World Wars may have been just a prelude to the horrors that lie ahead.

“Then there will be great apostasy when many shall be stumbled, and faithful servants of God will be betrayed by their closest relatives. This, too, has had a partial fulfillment during this dispensation. History repeats itself, both in the professing church and in the world.”

Hitler played havoc with the Christian churches in Germany and the other occupied countries. As I said earlier, many of the signs given by Jesus in the Olivet Discourse have happened over the centuries, but it’s the confluence for which we watch.

“The closer we come to the end the more active will Satan be, knowing his time is short. So ‘many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.’

“Because of abounding iniquity those professing allegiance to Christ will be grievously tested; and where love was only superficial it will become cold, and so apostasy will prevail.”

I agree with most of this. I will again note that the love growing cold is not just about the church, as others have also tried to say. And it’s not just for the ones with “superficial” love. Jesus did not single out a specific population that would suffer this; He just said “many”. My take is that this will happen to all who are not fully in Christ, both inside and outside the church. In my opinion, this has already started.   

“The test of reality in any age is endurance. So it is now, and so it will be in the day of grief and sorrow that lies ahead of Christendom. ‘He that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.’ In order to fit these solemn words into the truth revealed elsewhere of the believer’s eternal security, it is not necessary to say that they apply solely to the tribulation period. It is true always  that only those who endure shall be finally saved. But when one has been born of God and so received eternal life he will endure. ‘Whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith’ (1 John 5:4). He who makes a profession of faith in Christ and then in the hour of testing repudiates it and goes back like a dog to his vomit, or a sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire (2 Peter 2:20-22) gives evidence that he was never born of the Word and Spirit of God. Had such an one been a sheep belonging to the Good Shepherd he would never have been attracted to the hog-wallow.

“The great tribulation in its full sense will begin in the midst of the seventieth week — that is, of the last seven years of Daniel’s great time-prophecy.  It will be ushered in by the setting up of the abomination that maketh desolate. To this the next section refers.”              [from EXPOSITORY NOTES ON THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, by H. A. Ironside, 1948]

I like how Ironside brings the message to every day life. We all have things we have to “overcome.” And then I like how he brings it back to Daniel.

I think we will leave it there, on a good note. The next quote is quite long, so we will start fresh with it next time.