I have had several inquiries seeking a fuller explanatory justification
for my argument that Christ's attention turns from A.D. 70 to the future Second
Advent in the transition verses, Matthew 24:34-36. I would like to offer a
treatment of the matter.
The "Problem" with the Transition Text
It is frequently noted that the "coming of Christ" is mentioned before
and after the transition text of Matthew 24:34-36. It is further noted that
these references are virtually identical. For instance Matthew 24:27 reads:
"For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so
shall also the coming of the Son of man be." Compare this with post-transitional
Matthew 24:37: "But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son
of man be." How are we justified in taking two identical statements in the space
of a unified discourse and applying them to events separated by thousands (and I
suspect, tens of thousands) of years?
Linguistic Sense and Historical Referent
Now, is it hermeneutically possible for identical terms or phrases to be
applied to different events? As a matter of fact, it is not only possible, but
quite common in human language and biblical revelation. For astute students of
philosophy and theology it is not uncommon for there to be inter-contextual
differences between identical terms regarding sense and referent. Let me explain
what I mean.
The fundamental linguistic sense of 'coming' has to do with a visitation
of divine judgment upon man. This is the very essence of the notion of "the
coming of the Son of Man," for instance. But the particular historical referent
of a "coming' may be either the A.D. 70 coming, or the Second Advental coming to
punctuate the end of history - or some other divine judgment visitation.
Beyond the introduction of this matter relative to the philosophy of
language, it is important to realize that A.D. 70 is not unrelated to the Second
Advent. As the ending of the era of sacrificial rituals and Israel-exalting
redemptive history, A.D. 70 is a pre-consummational type of the Second Advent's
history ending, consummational conclusion. Hence, the similarity of language
and the mixing of ideas is justified on the basis of the relationship of type
(A.D. 70) to antitype (Second Advent) [This phenomenon of type/anti-type is very
common in Davidic/Messianic passages. In such references, what is said of the
historical King David often applies to the Messianic King Jesus.]
Examples of this sort of 'problem" abound in Scripture.
(1) The same sort of inter-contextual shift occurs in Revelation 20:46, where
two resurrectional coming-to-life occurrences are spoken of: one is spiritual,
the other physical. John himself, the writer of Revelation, gives us warrant
for making such an interpretive maneuver; see John 5:25-29 [He Shall Have
Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian
Economics, 1992),415-417.]
(2) Paul frequently shift his meaning of "law" in Romans 3-8 between the Old
Testament revelation as such, the Pharisaic idea of "law as meritorious
principle," and "Law as God's revealed non-meritorious standard of
righteousness" [See: John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1959), 1:105ff; 2:49ff.]
(3) When you compare John 2:13-17 with Matthew 21:12-13 you will find the
references to the cleansing of the Temple almost identical. But, of course,
they are separated by about three and one-half years.
More relevantly, various mentions of "the day of the Lord' are referred
to in Scripture. The general sense in all places is 'divine visitation in
judgment"; the specific referent might be upon Babylon (cp. Isa. 13:1 with 1:6,
9), Egypt (cp. Jer. 46:8, with 46:1 0), Israel (cp. Joel 1:2 with 1:1 5; cp.
Zeph. 1:1,2,4 with 1:7), or on the world at large (2 Pet. 3:10). For a
discussion of the 2 Peter 3 passage, see my He Shall Have Dominion, 301-305.
The Transition Text Revisited
Now let me turn to the reasons why I hold there is a contextual shift
here in Matthew 24:34-36, which reads: "Verily I say unto you, This generation
shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass
away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man,
no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only."
First, the Greek phrase PERI DE ("now concerning") in Matthew 24:36 is
used by Matthew as an indicator of a change of subject. Along with all the other
data below, this is strongly suggestive of the change I am suggesting.
Second, by all appearance Matthew 24:34 seems to function as a concluding
statement, having specific reference to the preceding events. If all of Matthew
24 were for the first century, why would not the Lord hold off on the concluding
statement until the end of His discourse? The following events (Matt. 24:36-51)
relate to some other event that was not to occur in 'this generation." Thus, all
events before verse 34 are to occur to 'this generation."
Third, there seems to be an intended contrast between that which is near
(in verse 34) and that which is far (in verse 36): this generation vs. that day.
It would seem more appropriate for Christ to have spoken of 'this day" rather
than 'that day" if He had meant to refer to the time of 'this generation.'
Fourth, along these same lines, we should notice the pretransition
emphasis on plural 'days" in contrast to the focus on the singular "day'
afterwards. 'This generation' involves many 'days" for the full accomplishment
of the protracted (Matt. 24:22) Great Tribulation. Indeed, were the Great
Tribulation on one particular day, its horror would be greatly reduced. By the
very nature of the case "that day' of the future Second Advent will come in a
moment, in the twinkling of an eye (cp. I Cor. 15:52). The Second Advent does
not span days, whereas the Great Tribulation does.
In Matthew 24:19, 22, and 29 the Lord makes reference to the plural
'days' that are fraught with judgment and terror. These involve times consumed
by war and famine (vv. 6-7), which take time. He does, of course, mention that
these people should pray that their flight not be on a singular 'sabbath' (Matt.
24:20). But this has reference to taking flight on any sabbath, not a particular
one. The Great Tribulation era will cover a number of sabbath days as it
develops.
It is true that Christ does speak of the future era of the Second Advent
as being like the "days [plural] of Noah" (Matt. 24:37, 38). But it is clear
that His focus is on "that" singular day, when Christ ("the Lord") comes to
punctuate the end of history (vv. 36, 50) and to bring final judgment upon men
(v. 51).
Fifth, before verse 34 there are signs to the A.D. 70 coming; after it
there are no signs. The time of Jerusalem's destruction is a sign-filled era
that called for attentive watching through sign reading. There will be false
Christs (v. 5), wars and rumors of wars (w. 6-7), famines and earthquakes (v.
7b), persecution and betrayal (vv. 9-1 2), and false prophets (v. I 1). His
hearers will be witness to the abomination of desolation (v. 15) and urged to
flee from the area when they see it (vv. 16-21). There will be great signs and
wonders (v. 24), of which He informs them, since He knows what is to come and
when (v. 25). Thus, when all these things begin occurring, they serve as signs
of the impending nearness of Christ's judgment coming on Jerusalem (vv. 32-33).
The time of its approach may be known.
After verse 34 such signs and objectively verifiable events vanish from
the discourse. His statements become more generic: the days will be like the
"days of Noah" (vv, 37-39) in which people were eating and drinking and
marrying, until the judgment falls on particular individuals (vv. 40-41) on that
particular 'day' (v. 42). This in effect speaks of signlessness: mundane social
concourse continues unawares. Thus, the Son of Man does not give concrete signs
of that future, Second Advental coming. There appears in the discourse at this
juncture generic encouragements to labor because of the lack of signs.
Sixth, even Christ Himself claims He does not know the time of the Second
Advent (v. 36). Whereas in the early section He clearly knows the time of the
events leading to the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70 (vv. 29-30). He
tells His disciples that certain signs may come, but He knows full well that
"the end is not yet' (v. 6). He dogmatically asserts that these things will
happen to "this generation" (v. 34). Thus, He can positively assert 'behold, I
have told you in advance" (v. 25).
Seventh, in the early section of Matthew 24, the time frame is clearly
specified: He asserts the nearness of events: "this generation" (v. 34). In the
following section (and into chapter 25, which is not separated from chapter 24
in the original) the reference is to a long delay: 'But and if that evil servant
shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming" (Matt. 24:48) 'While the
bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept" (Matt. 25:5). "After a long
time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them" (Matt. 25:19).
The designation "far" is certainly a relative concept. However, when used in a
context and in apposition to "this generation" designates, its relativity is in
strong contrast.
Eighth, in the early section of Matthew 24 the setting is chaotic, with
wars, quakes, and famines. Who can read the first portion of Matthew 24 without
a sense of turmoil and dread? Whereas, in the latter section the scene is
tranquil, with men carrying on their normal daily affairs as if nothing is going
to happen. This is a strong indicator of a major change of scenery. The
difference is between the war-torn Great Tribulation and the unexpected
appearance of Christ to end history.
A few adherents to the change of subject matter include F. T. France,
Matthew (Tyndale Commentaries), R. V. G. Tasker, The Gospel According to Matthew
(Tyndale), J. M. Kik, An Eschatology of Victory (P&R), and J. A. Alexander,
Matthew.
For those interested I have the following orthodox preterist study tapes
available. Order from me: Ken Gentry, 46 Main St., Conestee, SC 29636:
"The Divorce of Israel: Introduction and Survey of Revelation." 22
Tapes: $85.00
Syllabus (optional): $15.00
Set #30. "Major Bible Prophecies" (5 tapes: $23). 1993 Sacramento
Conference. (1) The Millennium (Rev. 20). (2) Daniel's 70 Weeks (Dan. 9). (3)
The Man of Sin (2 Thess. 2). (4) Heaven (John 14). (5) Unfulfilled Prophecies
(contra hyper-preterism).
Set #63. "Savannah Prophecy Conference" (7 tapes: $28) Introduction to
postmillennialism and preterism. (1) Postmillennialism: OT Evidence. (2)
Postmillennialism: NT Evidence. (3) Overview of Revelation (same as #36). (4)
Great Tribulation: 1st Century Proof. (5) Great Tribulation: 1st Century
Defense. (6) The Man of Sin. (7) Open Forum: Q&A.
Set #11. "Postmillennialism and Preterism" (4 tapes: $20). Lectures.
1992 Sacramento Eschatology Conference. (1) Postmillennialism: Wishful Thinking
or Certain Hope? (2) The Identity of the Beast of Revelation. (3) The
Resurrection of the Dead. (4) The Great Tribulation is Past.
© 1997 Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Th.D. . . . . . . . . . (Last update: March 15, 1997)
Mail questions and helpful comments to: jlcalvin@juno.com
Return to the Christian Reconstruction Debate page