Matthew 24 - Introduction

ORDER OF EVENTS. After the last public discourse (chap. 23) our Lord did not at once leave the temple, but (Mark 12:41-44; Luke 21:1-4) sat quietly in the court of the women, looking at those casting in their gifts, to find an opportunity for praising one act of real religion amidst all the hypocrisy He had just denounced. (Reformers may find a lesson here.) In perfect quietude of spirit, not in haste nor anger, He finally forsook ‘His own' who received Him not. As He was finally ‘departing' (Matthew 24:1), His disciples pointed out the magnificence of the various structures composing the temple. This brought out a prediction of its entire destruction. Passing out toward Bethany, He paused upon the Mount of Olives, looking towards the temple, as if still moved with compassion. His disciples (or more exactly four of them) inquired of Him, as to the time and signs of His coming. Chap. 24 is the answer, not yet fully understood. Chap. 25 was spoken on the same occasion.

This chapter refers both to the destruction of Jerusalem and to the second coming of Christ, one prophecy respecting two analogous events. This we may call the panoramic view of the prophecy, and it may be applied to other passages (in Revelation and elsewhere). Reasons: 1. An exclusive reference to either the destruction of Jerusalem or the second coming of Christ involves insuperable difficulties. 2. The disciples asked about both, joining them in time (Matthew 24:3). The answer therefore refers to both, joining them in character, not necessarily in time. The disciples needed instruction on both points, for immediate and more remote guidance. 3. The preceding discourse plainly points to the destruction of Jerusalem, but chap. 25 and Matthew 24:42-51 of this chapter, apply exclusively to the Christian dispensation. Great care is necessary in deciding what refers to each of the two sets of events (or, how far the analogy holds good). Alford and others seem correct in holding, that the two interpretations run parallel as far as Matthew 24:28, the judgment upon the Jewish Church being the predominant thought; after that the Lord's second coming is prominent, until in the close of the chapter it is exclusively treated of. Concerning this nothing definite as to time is made known (see Matthew 24:36), and the part that Jerusalem will sustain is and must be unknown, since prophecy is rarely designed to enable us to foretell future events. Lange regards both Chapter s as exhibiting ‘the judgments of His coming in a series of cycles, each of which depicts the whole futurity, but in such a manner that with every new cycle the scene seems to approximate to, and more closely resemble, the final catastrophe.'