The Olivet Discourse and a Study in Context (Matthew 24)

So, I decided to teach the book of Revelation.

Ami and I had been given purview over a college-aged Sunday school class with almost no oversight or guidance and so, in my wisdom as a fairly new Christian, I decided to teach the most controversial and difficult book in all of Scripture. Why not, right?

Now, how to go about this? I bought a John MacArthur commentary on Revelation and essentially taught the commentary to them. It’s John MacArthur, so it had to be right. MacArthur is nothing if not authoritative and I remember, in the back of my mind, as he is declaring with absolute conviction that this means that, and that symbolizes this, and so forth, I remember a small voice whispering, “How can he know that?”

But it’s John MacArthur.

Wars and Rumors of War

Ingrained tradition and teaching endures with a particularly stubborn persistence.

As one of the major texts concerning the Parousia, the Second Coming of Christ, the Olivet Discourse of Matthew 24 presents familiar language concerning the event. And so we read of “wars and rumors of wars”, that “nation will rise against nation”, and of “birth pains”. The reader is confronted with the prophecy of false christs deceiving many, and persecution, of the abomination of desolation, and of the Great Tribulation. Jesus describes global and even cosmic events such as falling stars, the darkening of the sun and the moon, and most of all, his “coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” (verse 30)

This must describe the Second Coming of Christ. It just has to.

But, what if it doesn’t?

The context is the key to biblical interpretation for any passage, much less the Olivet Discourse. I remember my surprise when a mentor of mine explained to me the context of the Discourse and the eureka moment when it all became clear, when the context drove me to interpretation rather than basing interpretation upon a predetermined framework, as is so tempting to do.

Context of the Discourse

For starters, Matthew 23 and 24 constitute a continuous interaction. The artificial break between the chapters divorces a key portion of the context from the Discourse itself in chapter 24.

Jesus spends much of the last week of His life in and around the Temple teaching to the crowds and the disciples. Sometimes the scribes, the Sadducees, and the Pharisees are present, sometimes even seeking to challenge Jesus on various issues. Chapter 23 constitutes Jesus’ most scathing critique of the religious leaders to date, to the crowds and the disciples, possibly with the leaders present. He utterly lambasts their religiosity, their legalism, their spiritual blindness. Over and over, he denounces them as “hypocrites!” or “blind guides”, even calling woe or judgment down upon them. He concludes the chapter with these astonishing words, “See, your house is left to you desolate,” referring to the Temple. (v. 38)

It is difficult for us today to fathom the shocking sentiment of this statement. To the Jew, the Temple was the very presence of God on earth, the place they went to seek God, to communicate with God, to hear from God, and Jesus tells them, it is no longer a place for Shekinah glory, but now is Ichabod, having been spiritually abandoned by the Lord. One can hardly imagine a more scathing rebuke of their entire worldview, their entire religious order.

Needless to say, as good Jews, the disciples were just as astonished as anyone. And as Jesus departs from the Temple, the disciples chase him down to seek some clarity. Verse 1 of chapter 24 records that they point out to him the Temple buildings that are standing, as if to ask, “Jesus, see this magnificent Temple. How can this be?”

Jesus responds, “You see all these…there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.” (24:2) Jesus affirms that not only has the glory of the Lord departed from the Temple, but the Temple itself will be destroyed. Then, as a physical representation of God’s spiritual repudiation of the Temple and in fulfillment of Ezekiel 11:23, Jesus departs the Temple to the east, to the Mount of Olives.

The disciples still don’t understand, so they come to him privately on the Mount of Olives to clarify asking, “when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” (v. 3) We must truly understand what they are asking before we can understand the entire Discourse. They essentially ask two questions. First, they ask when “these things” will be, as in, when will the Temple be destroyed. Second, they ask for the sign of his coming and of the end of the age. Because they are Jews, they mistakenly believe that the Temple will endure until the end of the age and Jesus’ coming, that these two events are simultaneous.

Jesus’ answer, which is what the Discourse is, reveals that these are two separate events divorced by time, that the destruction of the Temple, “these things”, will happen first and will be identified by various signs, while the end of the age is further in the future and will be imminent. The structure of the Discourse makes this clear.

Verses 4-35 answer the first question, when will the Temple be destroyed?

For starters, Jesus’ audience for these verses is “you” as in, the people he is addressing at that time, the disciples. Over and over, he addresses “you” as in “you will see” or “you will be hated” or “when you see” etc. (verses 4, 5, 9, 15, 20, 23, 25, 26, and 33) Verse 34 drives this point home, “Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” In order to somehow apply these verses to a future generation, now nearly 2000 years after the fact, one must somehow account for the targeted language throughout these verses culminating in verse 34. The word used for generation always means exactly that, generation. Some have postulated that it means “race” but that is simply not an intellectually honest rendering.

Honest commentators acknowledge the problem of the structure but have predetermined that verses 4-35 must somehow apply to a future time of judgment and tribulation. As such, it is better, as Guzik says, “to fit this promise into that framework.” I would respond that, it’s better to examine the Discourse in its original context.

Allow me to summarize. The disciples ask Jesus two questions: 1) when will the Temple be destroyed, and 2) what will be the sign of his coming and of the end of the age. Jesus answers question 1 in verses 4-35, telling them that within a generation, all of these things will come to pass…and that is exactly what happens! Culminating in the destruction of the Temple and the sacking of Jerusalem by Titus in A.D. 70, every single thing that Jesus prophesies in these verses can clearly be shown to have happened, though the extent of that discussion exceeds the scope of this short work concerning context. The point that Jesus makes is that they will see the destruction of the Temple coming. There will be signs…“But concerning that day [emphasis mine] and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.” (verse 36)

Verse 36 constitutes a shift, a fulcrum, whereby Jesus pivots from answering the first question to the second, what will be the sign of his coming and of the end of the age, and for the rest of chapter 24 and all of 25 he does exactly this. And one cannot help but notice a shift in the nature of the description. Concerning the end of the age, we see imminence, that it will be entirely unexpected, as Jesus clearly teaches throughout this section.

Now, if these two sections were to somehow refer to the same event, I would be hard-pressed to understand how there could be both clear and unmistakable signs (v.4-35) and it yet be unexpected (v.24:36-25:46). The simple answer is that they clearly refer to two separate events and to seek to apply them to both is to do exactly what Guzik concedes they are guilty of, forcing things into a predetermined framework while neglecting the context.

What Then Must We Do

1) We must continually assess our biblical interpretation, as to the extent our presuppositions color our understanding. We must always ask, “What have I been taught that Scripture says?” and “Does it actually align with the text? What is the context?”

2) From these verses, we see that God takes sin serious, to even bring judgment against national Israel, but that in His faithfulness, He preserves His people through all matters. Ultimately, we must be awake and ready, for the day of the Lord will come upon us “like a thief in the night.” (1 Thessalonians 5:2)