College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

Matthew 24:29-31

C. The Theological Results of Jerusalem's Fall (24:29-31)

TEXT: 24:29-31

(Parallels: Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28)

29 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 heaven shall be shaken: 30 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. 31 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.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS

Many people who read this paragraph understand it to picture the Second Coming of Christ at the end of the world. But, if the tribulation of those days mentioned in the previous sections concerns the destruction of Jerusalem, with what right can Jesus state that His coming would occur immediately after the tribulation? Or, is He mistaken, since He did not return shortly after 70 A.D.? Or does this paragraph have anything to do with His Second Coming?

Why do you suppose Jesus used this weird imagery to teach us: to make His meaning difficult or to simplify it? For whom would this imagery be particularly clear and communicate thrilling news in majestic concepts? Do you think that we too could understand Him, if we too could become like those who truly understood Him? What would it take to become like them?

Do you seriously believe that stars shall fall from heaven? After all, if stars are heavenly bodies like our sun, even larger and grander, how or where could they fall?

Jesus already talked about earthquakes in various places (Matthew 24:7) as well as terrors and great signs from heaven (Luke 21:11) in connection with the period prior to Jerusalem's fall. Once again He names what appear to be upheavals in nature (sun, moon, stars and powers of the heavens) in connection with the sign of the Son of man. (1) Is there any connection? If not, why not? (2) If these latter upheavals in nature are not to be considered literal, then, of what are they symbolic?

Did Jesus say that the sign of the Son of man (would) appear in heaven, or that the sign which would appear would be the Son of man in heaven? Is it the sign which is in heaven, or the Son of man? If you decide it is the latter, then, where is the sign located? In what would it consist?

Why do you think all the tribes would mourn when this great sign appears? What will the sign mean to them? What would it mean to the Christians?

Where do you suppose Jesus got all these unusual expressions, such as the sun darkened, the moon not give light, stars fall, or tribes of the earth mourn, or Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven, or with a great trumpet, or gather together from the four winds? Did Hebrews in Jesus-' time talk that way every day? If not, under what special circumstances did they use such phrases? Where did they get this language?

If someone argued that this paragraph has nothing to do with a literal Second Coming of Jesus, what arguments would you collect right out of the text itself to show his conclusion mistaken? What data would you expect him to use to establish his case?

If someone denies that this paragraph refers to Christ's Second Coming, has anything been lost for the doctrine of the literal Second Coming? Are there any other New Testament texts that teach this grand truth? If so, what are they?

If there are other New Testament texts that teach the Second Coming, are we free to consider this text in another sense, if this latter interpretation should turn out to be its true meaning rather than the Second Coming?

How could believers of Jesus-' generation be caused to rejoice when what He meant by His highly figurative language actually began to occur? (Cf. Matthew 24:34; Luke 21:28.)

If Jesus is not talking about the Second Coming at all, but about some quite earthly events in which His believers would be involved, what is to be gained by His using this prophetic jargon?

If the Messiah's victory is to occur immediately after the tribulation of those days, what kind of Messianic triumph actually took place following the destruction of Jerusalem?

Why do you suppose Luke greatly simplified this section for his readers? Would not they have understood these expressions taken from Jewish literature? What does this tell you about Matthew's production?

PARAPHRASE AND HARMONY

Nevertheless, IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE TRIBULATION THAT WILL TAKE PLACE IN THE PERIOD JUST DESCRIBED, there shall be portents involving the sun, moon and stars: -the sun shall be darkened. The moon will not give its light. Stars will be falling from the sky. The celestial forces will be shaken.-' On earth nations will be in anguish, bewildered by the roar of the raging sea. People will faint from terror, apprehensive about the events threatening the inhabited earth. At that time you will be able to see what is meant by -the Son of man in heaven.-' It is then that -all the tribes of the land will mourn.-' They too will experience what is meant by -the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven-' with power and great glory. He will then send forth His messengers -with a great trumpet.-' These will -gather-' His chosen people -from the four points of the compass, from the farthest horizon where heaven and earth meet.-' Now when THESE THINGS begin to occur, straighten up and lift your heads, because your emancipation is about to take place!

SUMMARY

In close chronological connection with the fall of Jerusalem, disciples would observe the removal of the old, established luminaries in human (esp. Jewish?) affairs. Christ's reign would be clearly evident. Worldwide gospel proclamation would successfully save those who accepted to be chosen by God. These events would all be clues of the final emancipation of Christianity from Judaism, establishing the disciples of Christ as an independent people of God.

INTRODUCTION: HOW SHOULD WE INTERPRET THIS LANGUAGE?

Some conclude that Jesus-' language in this section is too grand to depict an incident so limited as the fall of Jerusalem, or too broad to concern only one of earth's peoples, the Jews alive in 70 A.D. But before proceeding, we must ask, not modern questions, but ancient ones: what would the original listeners have understood Jesus to mean by the language He used? In fact, as a thorough concordance study of this paragraph will demonstrate, almost every phrase is rich in literary history, having already been utilized by some Old Testament prophet to communicate awe-inspiring messages of both hope and doom to their contemporaries. What, then, would the first-century Hebrew readers of the Gospels have comprehended when Jesus made these statements?

THE PROPHETS-' USE OF SIMILAR LANGUAGE, to predict the tremendous consequences surrounding the fall of pagan empires, may be thought useful language to describe one of history's greatest watershed events, the collapse and termination of Israel's exclusive privilege. If carnal Judaism is finally and publicly to be repudiated by God so that His precious elect remnant in Israel and among the nations can stand free and independent to carry out its world mission, then this event qualifies as one of the world's most momentous theological events, and should not appropriate language be adopted to portray it?

In the entire paragraph (Matthew 24:29-31) the point to be solved is whether a personal appearance of the Lord is intended. The assumption of many is that the coming is literal, as also every other detail in this passage. However, were they literal when originally coined by the prophets from whom they are borrowed? If not, then by what exegetical rule do they become so in Jesus-' discourse? If the prophets smoothly blended the literal and the poetic in the same prophecy, why cannot Jesus?

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. What appears to be a universe gone wild is familiar talk for Hebrews saturated with Old Testament prophets like Isaiah (Isaiah 13:9-13) where similar apocalyptic language was coined to depict quite mundane events such as the destruction of Babylon by the Medes. Now, when an author clearly defines the meaning of his own jargon in the same context, we are not at liberty to require that he mean something else, even though his words seem to communicate much more to us because of the meanings WE associate with his expressions. (Cf. Isaiah 24:18 b - Isaiah 24:23 on the rise and fall of human government without God.) Later, Isaiah (Isaiah 34:4 f.) employed similar poetic language to illustrate the earth-shaking magnitude of divine judgment on the Edomites. Ezekiel (Ezekiel 32:7 f.) does not hesitate to borrow this eloquent speech to threaten Pharaoh and Egypt with heavenly chastisement, not by supernatural miracles, but by the quite earthly sword of the king of Babylon (Ezekiel 32:11 ff.). Joel presses this kind of speech into service to represent a locust invasion (Joel 2:10 f.), the blessing to God's people (Joel 2:30 f.) and His judgment on their foes (Joel 3:14 ff.). The Apostle Peter gave the inspired interpretation of Joel's apocalyptic language, by pointing to the events that began on Pentecost as fulfilling Joel's words: This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel. (Acts 2:16-21; cf. Joel 2:28-32; see my notes, Vol. II, 452f.) Haggai uses the shaking of heavens, earth, the sea and the dry land, to unfold images of international war that would turn out to the blessing of God's people. (Cf. Habakkuk 3:11; Amos 8:9.)

Do the sciences of astronomy, geology or ancient history confirm a literal interpretation on the terrifying cosmic disorder this Old Testament language seems to convey? On the other hand, does ancient history record the actual fulfillment of what these poetic pictures conveyed, by the overthrow of the particular nations indicated? So, what this phraseology sounds like to us does not matter. For if, by the vivid images the prophets wove, God referred to earth-shaking events whereby pyramids of power would be overturned and shattered, THIS IS THE MEANING. The only question now remaining is to what great overthrow or high-level transformation in human affairs resulting from Jerusalem's fall and the Gospel's spread does Jesus allude here?

Was this highly symbolic language thought literal by intertestamental apocalyptists? (Cf. Assumption of Moses Matthew 10:4-7; IV Ezra 5:4-13.) And the Apostle John, like Isaiah, Ezekiel and Joel, employed these same apocalyptic concepts to describe God's judgment on men of earth who seek to escape God's final punishment (Revelation 6:12-17). His language, as defined by his book's title is to be understood as highly figurative, not literal: The apocalypse of Jesus Christ (Revelation 1:1). Cannot Jesus Christ Himself use the commonly accepted apocalyptic jargon of His day to convey His meaning to people who were accustomed to it? Milton Terry (Hermeneutics, 466) justly lamented:

We might fill volumes with extracts showing how exegetes and writers on New Testament doctrine assume as a principle not to be questioned that such highly wrought language as Matthew 24:29-31. taken almost verbatim from Old Testament prophecies of judgment on nations and kingdoms which long ago perished, must be literally understood. Too little study of Old Testament ideas of judgment, and apocalyptic language and style, would seem to be the main reason for this one-sided exegesis. It will require more than assertion to convince thoughtful men that the figurative language of Isaiah and Daniel, admitted on all hands to be such in those ancient prophets, is to be literally interpreted when used by Jesus or Paul.

The vocabulary was common to the Hebrew culture and gleaned from the Old Testament literature itself. The people brought up in that culture understood the terms. This explains why this apparently unconventional vocabulary would, in a sense, come to be thought of as the conventional expression for certain types of predictions. This vocabulary consists of vivid images that endeavor to describe the indescribable in human language. The power of such visions lies, not in the details, but in their ability to communicate the inconceivable in word-pictures that men can conceive.

To this some would object that to welcome the spiritual significance of the prophet's words is to reject the true meaning. But more often than not, in apocalyptic literature, the true meaning is not the literal one at all, but the spiritual one, the actual one, the real one, because for God, WHATEVER IS SPIRITUAL IS REAL TOO, perhaps far more so than what is material, and should not we have the same attitude?

THE THEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE EVENTS REQUIRES SUCH LANGUAGE. Because God was planning to bring about deep-running changes in the religion and political life of that people which for millennia had been His chosen people, the language used to paint this revolution must be adequate to portray the transformation. The Jewish loss of their exclusive glory, unique privileges and national prerogatives cannot but represent the cruelest blow imaginable to this people. What kind of speech could be thought sufficiently appropriate to articulate such a catastrophe? Kik (Matthew XXIV, 79) asked, If the use of such figurative judgment language against pagan nations was justified, how much more fitting would it be to the passing away of Judaism? Bruce (Exp. Gr. Test., 287) saw this:

An old world is going down and a new world is coming into being. Here surely is an occasion to provoke the prophetic mood! At such supreme crises prophetic utterances, apocalyptic forecasts, are inevitable.

Should such awe-inspiring language be thought too terrible or too broad for the final vanquishing of Israel by the Romans, let its larger context be recalled. God had threatened that the doom of unrepentant Israel was sealed (Deuteronomy 28:15-68; Deuteronomy 29:19-28; Deuteronomy 30:18; Deuteronomy 31:16-21; Deuteronomy 31:27 ff.; Deuteronomy 32:1-43; Malachi 3:2-5; Malachi 4:1 f.; Matthew 3:7-10; Matthew 8:11 f; Matthew 21:31; Matthew 21:41; Matthew 21:43; Matthew 22:7; Matthew 23:29-39). Even as early as His conversation with the Samaritan woman, Jesus affirmed that Jerusalem would not be the center of worship in the Messianic age (John 4:21). So, Jerusalem's elimination was to be God's signal to the Judeo-Christian world that the old Mosaic era, with its exclusively Jewish Kingdom of God and its capital at Jerusalem, was terminated. (Cf. Galatians 4:25-31.) The bondage is over, not merely ideally, as when Christ's death ended the Law theologically, but also practically, in concretely evident fact (Hebrews 12:11; Hebrews 13:14).

NOTES

1. The time connection: Immediately after Jerusalem's great tribulation (24:29a)

Matthew 24:29 But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun shall be darkened ... Unquestionably the tribulation of those days is the same sufferings (Matthew 24:8) described earlier as great tribulation. in those days (Matthew 24:19-22), a period that Luke (Luke 21:23 f.) characterizes as great distress upon the earth and wrath upon this people. They shall fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trodden down by the Gentiles. Therefore, what is meant by the phraseology of our paragraph (Matthew 24:29-31) must take place immediately after that period of tribulation surrounding the appalling desolation of the Jewish State. (Cf. Mark 13:24.) What is about to be pictured would have a certain immediacy of connection, even if the event itself is not an integral part of that tribulation or its culmination per se. It would express the same sort of relationship that exists between cause and effect, antecedents and consequences.

It is mistaken to affirm, with some, that the glorious signs and predictions here listed hardly appear suited to Jerusalem's fall. Granted, but these signs and predictions here listed a different, more glorious event portrayed in Matthew 24:30-31. However, the intended event would be not at all distant in time. This is excluded by Jesus-' insistence that it be immediately after the foregoing catastrophe.

Further, Matthew 24:32-34 speak unquestionably of Jerusalem's destruction after the great tribulation and other successive events, because all these are scheduled to occur during the lifetime of Jesus-' contemporaries. (See on Matthew 24:32-34.) Therefore, to think of Matthew 24:29-31 as depicting the Second Coming is not only to insert this subject out of place, creating a confused chronological order, but also it makes Christ assert that His own coming was scheduled for a moment immediately after the fall of Jerusalem, although He later denied any definite knowledge of the Father's scheduling for the Second Coming (Matthew 24:36) and clearly hinted that a long, indefinite period must elapse first (Matthew 24:48; Matthew 25:5; Matthew 25:19). The expression, immediately after, is wrongly taken figuratively while all else is taken literally.

How should we deal with the contention that Luke's version (Luke 21:23-27) extends the tribulation in question from the fall of Jerusalem and the worldwide Jewish dispersion, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, i.e. the entire period of Gentile dominance from the end of Israel as a nation until Jesus returns again? According to this view, Jesus-' return, pictured by Matthew 24:29-31, occurs immediately after the Gentile persecution of the Jews. On the contrary,

Jesus did not imply that the crisis of the great distress itself would last this long, but only that the RESULT of that disaster, the ruin of Jerusalem, would be long-lasting (Luke 21:24).

Further, He is not describing the great (Christian) tribulation, which indeed must last until His Return, but only the Jewish one, from which the early Christians could escape by obeying Jesus. From their own sufferings Christians could not flee without faithlessness to Him. (Cf. Revelation 1:9; Revelation 7:14.)

Some, because they view the Second Coming as scheduled immediately after the tribulation of those days of Jerusalem's deathblow, assert that the tribulation He means merely COMMENCED with the collapse of the Jewish nation. Further harassment, persecution and dispersion began hard on the heels of that debacle, i.e. immediately after, and have continued down to the present day in which Israel, as a nation, is still subjected to an uncertain future at best and to continual war-time emergencies at worst. However, the Lord divulged that the days are to be shortened, NOT LENGTHENED NEARLY 2000 YEARS (Matthew 24:22).

Further, how should we deal with the contention that Luke's version (Luke 21:24-28) merely declares what would occur after the Gentiles had had their day, i.e. the signs that would prefigure Christ's coming? At least two rebuttals are possible:

His Return is not an event subject to prior warning signals, hence whatever is intended cannot be the Second Coming.

Luke is merely returning to the point in Jesus-' discourse where He left off discussing the fall of Israel to indicate how long its suffering would endure. There is no time connection indicated in Luke's text, only an and, so who can prove he must be understood to indicate facts to occur at least two millennia later, if not longer? (Cf. Luke 21:24 f.)

So, immediately after cannot be interpreted in some figurative sense that attempts to avoid its normal, obvious sense, while interpreting literally such contextual phenomena as the sun's darkening and the fall of the stars, etc., language which, in the prophets, had acquired a conventional, hence well-understood, symbolic sense. To affirm the non-literal character of the symbols used in this paragraph detracts nothing from the admittedly literal character of the final world conflagration described elsewhere (2 Peter 3:7-13; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9).

What about PROPHETIC PERSPECTIVE? Some affirm that immediately after expresses the prophet's perspective in the sense that the Seer conceives of the events as mountain peaks in the distance without being able to discern or reveal the precise distance or relationship of one peak to the other. He can describe them as one in the foreground and the other immediately after, or behind it. The consecutive order of the two key events prophesied is indicated, but not the time intervening between them. However, while prophetic perspective is at times undoubtedly a characteristic of true prophecy, this explanation must be resorted to when the events predicted cannot be considered to be connected directly in time. However, as will be shown, this impossibility does not exist in the relationship between the fall of Jerusalem and the events Jesus proceeds to portray.

If it be asked why immediately after should be understood literally, when everything following it should be considered apocalyptic jargon, hence figuratively, it is because the realities expressed in figurative language actually take place in time sequences and so require time indicators to express these chronological relationships. Hence, Jesus rightly indicated the temporal-' connection between the foregoing prophecies and what follows.

From thepoint of view of Jewish nationalism, Jesus-' expression, immediately after, is both incredible and shocking. For, how could a true, competent Christ appear immediately after His own Temple and capital City were demolished and His own people were dragged into captivity? Nothing Jesus promised in the following section (Matthew 24:29-31) established Israel's priority or justified strictly nationalistic chimeras. Rather, He says much to dash such hopes. For, immediately after means He would come too late to be of any use to the Zealots and all who ultimately subscribed to their understanding of the Messianic Kingdom. It is this very feature, His immediately after, that marks Him as a truly God-sent Christ whose program would shake the earth, rearrange previously well-established powers on earth and accomplish what Judaism never could. From God's point of view, therefore, Jesus-' timing, immediately after, would be perfect!

2. The collapse and removal of the old, established luminaries (24:29b)

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. If these phenomena are figurative, as argued earlier, to what, then, do they refer? That heavenly bodies are used in Scripture to signify quite earthly people and events is well-established. Joseph's dream of the sun, moon and eleven stars referred only to his own family (Genesis 37:9 f.). Nebuchadnezzar is addressed as fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn. cast down to earth, because of his self-exaltation to heaven to raise his throne above the stars of God and make himself like the Most High (Isaiah 14:12 ff.). Compare Daniel's description of another earthly king (Daniel 8:10; Daniel 8:23 ff.; Daniel 11:36 f.). The logic of this literary phenomenon is understandable because sun, moon, stars and the power of the heavens for the ancient peoples signified everything that speaks to mankind of permanence and stability. Man measured his days by the sun; his seasons by the moon; his trackless path by the stars. Many assumed that life is influenced by the powers of the heavens. Consequently, as Luke puts it (Matthew 21:25 f.), a universe running amok terrifies earth's people who know nothing of God's loving dominion. Worlds in chaos is highly suitable metaphorical language to depict the downfall of potentates, the eclipse of nations and the tumult of peoples.

In harmony with the symbolism created by the Old Testament writers, Jesus means that what occurs at the highest levels of government and the international level deeply affects the well-being and tranquility of the people involved. (Cf. 1 Timothy 2:2.) In apocalyptic language the sea (cf. Luke 21:25) symbolizes the world's peoples. (Cf. Daniel 7:2 f., Daniel 7:17; Revelation 13:1; Revelation 13:11; Revelation 17:1; Revelation 17:15.) Thus, the little people of the world are profoundly shaken as top-level revolutions shake everything loose thought securely nailed down and on which society's emotional stability depends. So, Jesus is declaring that, immediately after the tribulation of those days surrounding Jerusalem's fall, believers would witness the breakup of all that had seemed most permanent and durable before. This great Day of the Lord would signal the end of the existing dispensation. But to which specific heaven did Jesus allude?

THE CHRISTIAN FIRMAMENT? What if this language, once used to depict deep-running convulsions in world politics, is now utilized by Jesus to depict the apostasy in the Church's life history, as some suggest? These see the sun as God's Son of righteousness, His Son, Jesus. (Cf. Malachi 4:2.) The moon, because it shines by light reflected from the sun, becomes dark when the sun is darkened. If it is the Church that reflects the light of Christ in this dark world, than her influence is eclipsed when men lose respect for the Lordship of Christ, even in the Church. Accordingly, the stars, looked at from the point of view of popular astronomy, are lesser lights in God's firmament of luminaries. These would symbolize those messengers in the Church whose ability to give men guidance is dimmed by a growing apathy toward God's Word. (Cf. Revelation 1:16; Revelation 1:20; Revelation 2:5.) In this sense, then, roots of apostasy, already manifest in the apostolic period, would produce a general defection from God's revelations, faithfulness to the Lord would wane and the Church would truly undergo the Dark Ages. This dimming of the Greater Light and the Lesser Lights actually occurred reasonably immediately after the tribulation of those days in 70 A.D. The farther the Church moved from the revealed truth after the death of the Apostles and early witnesses, the dimmer grew its witness, leaving a distressed world without confident leadership that would preach only God's Word. But from the standpoint of His Jewish audience, it would seem more probable that Jesus referred to something more in line with the Old Testament revelations to Israel.

THE JEWISH HEAVENS. He meant the Jewish heavens of His own era, the religious and civil powers of that condemned nation. Because the religious authority was of such crucial importance for the supreme uniqueness of Judaism, the tottering and collapse of the Temple, its priesthood and sacrificial system could be considered by the orthodox and reflective among the people as nothing less than the end of an era (sunteleìas toû aiônos; Matthew 24:3). During the first fifty years of the first century, for example, who could have foreseen with certainty that Herod Antipas, Annas, Caiaphas and all they stood for in the world would all be rudely snatched from their Jewish heaven and hurled into political oblivion? And yet those stars fell, that sun and moon shone no more! If these cataclysmic events are correctly interpreted as applying to Israel's defeat, then it is clear that immediately after their national disaster of 70 A.D., the once-exalted, unique theocracy of Israel went into permanent eclipse as God's light-bearers before the nations. (Study Hebrews 12:25-29 as commentary on this transition.) Now the Church of Christ occupies this glorious position (Philippians 2:15 f.; John 8:12; Matthew 5:14 ff.; 1 Peter 2:9 f.). Although Christianity would be established at a time when kingdoms, thrones and religious systems would be thoroughly shaken, it would be a Kingdom that shall never be shaken or replaced by anything better this side of glory (Daniel 2:44; Daniel 7:14; Hebrews 12:28). From the viewpoint of Jesus-' contemporaries, the loss of Judaism's glory would be a world-shaking tragedy indeed, an eclipse. From God's point of view; however, the removal of things that can be shaken in order to establish a Kingdom that cannot be shaken is but to treat the former as obsolete. What, for Him, was already growing old was ready to vanish away even in the first century (Hebrews 8:13; Hebrews 12:27 f.).

3. The Messiah's victorious, heavenly reign vindicated (24:30)

Matthew 24:30 Then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven. Then, as in Matthew 24:9, may mean (1) during that time just alluded to; or (2) thereafter, after the events just mentioned, next in order. As will be seen, either meaning is applicable here, because in the light of the conflagration that destroyed Jerusalem's Temple the Jews could see Jesus-' every warning and prophecy fully justified, and His authority vindicated more and more with the passing of the old order.

Then shall appear the sign, but Jesus does not indicate where it would be seen. He certainly did not affirm that a sign would appear in heaven, because in heaven does not modify sign, but the Son of man. It is not, as many believe, the sign in heaven, but the Son of man in heaven. What does appear will indicate (= signify) the presence of the Son of man in heaven.

But is this a genitive of apposition or a genitive of source?

Genitive of Apposition: the sign which is the Son of man in heaven. Some argue that Christ is His own self-evidencing sign. But, if the appearance of the Son of God in the sky were the sign, then Jesus would be using the word sign in a way foreign to every other normal meaning of this term. Normally, a sign substitutes for the object to which it points, so how could He Himself be the sign, when His own personal appearance is supposedly the reality to be pointed out?

Genitive of Source: the sign comes from, or is given by, the Son of man in heaven, sent by Him to indicate something to men. This is the conventional use of this term and the preferable interpretation.

Jesus furnished His people a sign that would be plainly evident on earth, that would convince thoughtful, informed men that He had indeed been exalted to heavenly power, i.e. that He is truly the Son of man and is in heaven, and that His divine authority, supernatural power and providential influence is at work in all these earthly events. At this point He passes over in silence all the great miracles that He would have been doing for more than forty years previous to this last, great demonstration. Thus, just as He passed over the multiplicity of miracles He was doing during His earthly ministry and pointed to His resurrection as the grand proof of His identity and authority (cf. John 2:19-22; Matthew 12:38-40), Jesus does not mention all the powerful evidences of the Holy Spirit's activity from Pentecost until 70 A.D., opting to give men as final proof an evidential sign which consisted in the wrecking of the old institutions of Judaism.

So, the sign of the Son of man in heaven has nothing to do with the Second Coming, because, though the disciples had requested the sign of your coming (parousìa) (Matthew 24:3), Jesus declared that His Second Coming would occur with no prior indication of its near approach. No forewarning sign could or would be given (Matthew 24:36, Matthew 24:42 ff., Matthew 24:50; Matthew 25:13). Therefore, what is meant by Matthew 24:30, where a sign is clearly promised, cannot refer to an event which, by divine decree, can have no early warning signal. The sign in question will be further amplified shortly.

And then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn. The translation, earth,(gê) is misleading since the Greek gê also means a land, region or country. In the Hebrew mind the land par excellence is the Promised Land, Palestine. Conclusive confirmation of this interpretation comes from Zechariah 12:10 ff., the source of Jesus-' language. That prophet predicted that, following an unusual out-pouring of grace and supplication on the royal Davidic house and on Jerusalem's inhabitants, God's people would look on Him, the One whom they pierced and mourn bitterly as for a firstborn son. The weeping in Jerusalem would be so great as to be reminiscent of the nation's grief when the good king Josiah fell in battle in the area of Megiddo (2 Chronicles 35:20-25). Rightly did they mourn, for with Josiah's untimely death religious reform ended and Israel's final decline accelerated as the nation plunged toward disaster and captivity. The national mourning involved the entire land of Israel (Heb. ha eretz; Gr. he gê). Each tribe of Israel would mourn, tribe by tribe (LXX: katà fulàs fulàs). Then he names the royal and religious authorities of Israel, the house of David and the family of Levi, whose loss is selected for special notice in that their lineal descendants stand for the Messianic line and the Priesthood respectively. Finally, Zechariah affirms that all the tribes remaining would also join in the national grief. Jerusalem particularly but also all of Israel would weep over her King who came to save His people (Zechariah 9:9) but was valued at thirty pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12). Although He was Himself deity, He would be pierced (Zechariah 12:11) and His flock scattered (Zechariah 13:7).

Jesus-' allusion, then, cannot be to pagan clans scattered throughout the inhabited earth, but specifically to the stricken tribes of the ancient people of God, the Jews who inhabited the land of Israel. Now, while this prophecy would find immediate fulfillment during Jesus-' own suffering (John 19:37; Luke 23:27 ff., Luke 23:48), He affirms that the time would come when the Jews would once again grieve bitterly.

NOTE: their mourning is not even primarily connected with Jesus-' Second Coming, as some interpret Revelation 1:7, but must find direct connection with His suffering during His first coming (John 19:37). If John rightly applies Zechariah 12:10 to Christ's crucifixion, he proves that reference to the Second Coming is not the only appropriate fulfillment and one's interpretation of Revelation 1:7 must take this fact into account.

While some assume that the mourning arises out of all sinners-' recognition that Jesus has personally returned to be their implacable Judge, this conclusion is less likely than two more probable alternatives, both of which express Zechariah's full concept:

Godly sorrow leads to genuine repentance (2 Corinthians 7:8-11; Consider Luke 23:48 and John 19:37 in the light of Acts 2:37-41). In the fulfillment, those who were deeply convicted of their guilt of rejecting their long-awaited Messiah, turned to the great Sin-bearer, Jesus, mourning their sinfulness and were graciously saved by His Gospel in time. (Cf. Zechariah 12:10; Zechariah 13:1.)

Hopeless mourning is that worldly grief that merely regrets wasted opportunities and bad results but leads to no moral decision to submit to Jesus and ends only in death (2 Corinthians 7:10). In the fulfillment, those Jews who continue obstinately in their unbelief and rejection of Jesus, would shriek with despair, because unwilling to change their past and unable to alter the consequences of their unbelief. It is striking that, in 70 A.D., Israel permanently lost all hope for her royal house (DAVID) and her entire sacrificial system of purification before God (LEVI) in one blow.

Jesus-' time connection is highly revealing: when the sign of the Son of man in heaven appears, then will Israel mourn, as if the cause of their desperation and sorrow were the appearing of the sign. The connection is clear: those who assassinated God's Son would live to see the day when He would be gloriously vindicated and the resultant heinousness of their crime against Him appropriately exposed and punished. Further, in Jesus-' context, their grief may also be occasioned by the shaking of the powers of the heavens (Matthew 24:29). If by that phrase He meant the collapse of their once glorious system whereby Israel bore the light of God in pagan darkness, then the definitive loss of this exalted, unique institution must provoke deep mourning in all those who profoundly felt this grave loss. But Jesus does not leave them in ignorance about the true motive of their grief. This is revealed in further fulfillment of prophecy.

And they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. Because Jesus indicated no time sequence between this declaration and the preceding, as if the event involved followed it, we are free to consider this sentence as an expansion of His earlier phrase, the sign of the Son of man in heaven, which, when seen, caused the tribes of the land to mourn. The words, Son of man and heaven, naturally suggest this connection.

When Mark and Luke report only this phrase without mentioning the sign, they are only being less explicit than Matthew. They correctly quoted Jesus-' words which summarize Daniel 7:13 f., and must not be understood as promising a personal appearance in the skies. Matthew is more precise in that he first indicates that men would behold the appearance of a sign that Jesus Christ now reigns in heaven. Then, in harmony with Mark and Luke, our author quotes the prophetic words that define the content of that sign. So, we interpret the less explicit statements of Mark and Luke in light of the fuller citations of Jesus-' words by Matthew, not vice versa.

Because the tribes of the earth indicated in the citation from Zechariah are the Jewish people, it is principally, although not exclusively, they who shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven. So, if the primary focus is on carnal Israel's seeing this reality and mourning because of it, what more significant realization could be imagined in all history than when all of unbelieving Israel gathered together in the land as a nation for one last fatal assembly before its final, millennial dispersion, i.e. at the Passover of 70 A.D.? This restriction of time and place would exclude the Second Coming as its primary fulfillment.

Once again Jesus adopted well-known Old Testament phraseology to express His own concepts (Daniel 7:9-14). Daniel dreamed he saw God as a great, venerable Old Man seated on a throne of judgment. This tribunal was to be held in the era of the fourth great world empire (Daniel 7:15-27). Even though the full implications of what occurred then would not be fully realized until Final Judgment, something began that would transform world history. In fact, onto the stage before the throne there came one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. Observe: the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven WAS NOT APPROACHING EARTH, BUT THE THRONE OF THE ALMIGHTY. In Daniel's vision, coming on the clouds means that the Son of man was coming onstage, into the scene. It is not a coming toward Daniel or toward earth, but a coming seen from the standpoint of God, since Daniel uses three verbs that all indicate this: coming. approached. was led to the Ancient One. This is no picture of the Second Coming, because the Son of man is going the wrong way for that. His face is turned, not toward earth, but toward God. His goal is not to receive His saints, but to receive His Kingdom. (Cf. 1 Peter 3:22; Luke 19:12; Acts 2:32-36; Acts 3:22; Acts 5:31; Colossians 3:1; Revelation 3:21.) Daniel continued (Matthew 7:14),

He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.

Jesus summarized this verse by describing the coming of the Son of man with power and great glory.

The TIME indicated by Daniel for this transfer of imperial power from the domain of world monarchs to that of the Kingdom of the Son of man and of the saints of God, was after the rise of the fourth great world empire, Rome. (Cf. Daniel 2:44; Daniel 7:17 f.) This coincides with Jesus-' other time notices, as His disciples must expect to see the Son of man coming in His kingdom during their lifetime, an appearance which would unquestionably prove the kingdom of God come with power (Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1). This time-frame is repeated in this discourse too (Matthew 24:34; cf. Matthew 23:36).

So, Jesus-' use of Daniel's imagery implies that Israel would see the day when Daniel's words must apply most clearly and meaningfully to Himself, i.e. when His own divine authority would be vindicated beyond all doubt. But there arises a natural question: how would skeptical Jews be convinced of this conclusion? How could anyone trace a cause/effect relationship between Christ's invisible, heavenly sentences (cause) and earthly events (effect)? Further, the expression, they shall see, would seem fatal to any INVISIBLE coming of the Son of man on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory! However, three facts must be reckoned with:

Christ's Kingdom and rule is not some future aspiration, but a present reality.

Christ need not be visible to manifest His authority on earth.

Christians, too, will see and comprehend Christ's triumph.

CHRIST REIGNS NOW

Indisputably, our participation in the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is yet future (Acts 14:22; 2 Timothy 4:18; 2 Peter 1:11). Nevertheless, His rule is not merely future aspiration, but a present reality. (See my Special Study on the Kingdom, Vol. III, 160ff.) That His rule has already begun and does not await some distant date is fact.

He possessed universal authority even before His ascension (Matthew 11:27; Matthew 12:28; Matthew 28:19; John 5:21-29; John 17:2). Was this merely nominal, unsubstantial, fictitious or true authority?

His coming in His Kingdom occurred in the lifetime of the Apostles (Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1). On Pentecost men submitted to His Lordship (Acts 2:33-36) and were transferred out of Satan's realm into the kingdom of His beloved Son (Colossians 1:13). Believers preached (Acts 20:25) and suffered for His Kingdom in the first century (Revelation 1:9).

Christ's rule is carried on from God's heavenly throne (Ephesians 1:20 ff.; Hebrews 1:3).

Christ's Kingdom was given to humble, teachable disciples (Matthew 18:3 f.; Matthew 19:14; Matthew 21:31 f.; Luke 12:32; Luke 22:29 f.). Being not of this world, His Kingdom is no threat to the proper exercise of civil authority (John 18:36).

His Kingdom must continue until every enemy is destroyed (Hebrews 2:14 f; Hebrews 10:12 f.; 1 John 3:8; 1 Corinthians 15:24-28).

His sovereignty is partially expressed in the earthly warfare of His saints against spiritual hosts of wickedness in heavenly places, but with spiritual, not material, weapons (Ephesians 6:10 ff.; 2 Corinthians 10:3-6) and with spiritual results (1 John 5:4-5; John 16:33).

That Christ's Kingdom will become undeniably evident at the Final Judgment is unquestioned and is probably the splendid climax and final fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy. What is here affirmed, rather, is that even now the Son of God rules, judges, raises up and casts down whomever He will, and that this Kingdom, however invisible or intangible, is not unreal, impractical, insignificant or powerless.

CHRIST'S REIGN NEED NOT BE VISIBLE TO BE REAL

Some assume that they shall see ..., means that for Jesus to come on the clouds or to reign on earth, He must be visible. If such an invisible Kingdom seem impractical, unreasonable or unworthy of divine government, let God's mighty, historical judgments on the world's nations, empire and kings testify. They are not uninstructive (Romans 15:4; 1 Corinthians 10:11; 2 Timothy 3:14-17).

How has God manifested His presence to men to make His reality recognizable to them? He presented Himself visibly in physical form to Abraham (Genesis 18) or to Moses as the angel of the Lord (Exodus 3:2-5) or to others in vision (Isaiah 6:1; Ezekiel 1:25 ff; Ezekiel 3:23; Ezekiel 10:18 f; Ezekiel 11:23). These unquestionably real self-revelations, however, do not exclude another mode whereby God manifested Himself to men. Is a visible presence essential to fulfill the requirements of the following texts: Genesis 11:5 f.; 1 Samuel 3:10; 1 Samuel 5:1-12; 1 Samuel 6:5? Did the burning bush experience of Moses or the pillar of fire exhaust the meaning of God's affirmation: I am come down to deliver (Exodus 3:8)? Was He not raining down plagues on Egypt, defeating the cream of Pharaoh's army and working mighty miracles for Israel, even without a visible, physical presence? The complaining Israelites could still snarl, Is the Lord among us or not (Exodus 17:7)? His was not a material apparition but a nevertheless real leadership by His Holy Spirit (Isaiah 63:10-14). Was His fellowship less real to believers merely because it was spiritual and invisible? (Contrast Isaiah 42:19 f.)

How did God manifest His presence at the national and international level to convict men of His sovereignty? What did man see?

One major prophetic emphasis of Ezekiel's message is to communicate God's self-revelation by means of a series of events undeniably evident in world history, whereby all who ever heard of these facts could recognize that these incidents were no mere chance occurrences, but nothing less than the carefully planned activity of a sovereign, living God.

(1)

34 times God concludes a threatened punishment upon Israel, affirming, I will stretch out my hand against them and make the land a desolate waste. Then they will know that I am the Lord. then you will know that it is I the Lord who strikes the blow (Ezekiel 2:5; Ezekiel 5:13 ff.; Ezekiel 6:7; Ezekiel 6:10; Ezekiel 6:13 f.; Ezekiel 7:4; Ezekiel 7:9; Ezekiel 7:27; Ezekiel 11:10; Ezekiel 11:12; Ezekiel 12:15 f., Ezekiel 12:20; Ezekiel 13:9; Ezekiel 13:14; Ezekiel 13:21; Ezekiel 13:23; Ezekiel 14:8; Ezekiel 15:7; Ezekiel 17:21; Ezekiel 17:24; Ezekiel 20:38; Ezekiel 20:44; Ezekiel 20:48; Ezekiel 21:5; Ezekiel 22:16; Ezekiel 22:22; Ezekiel 23:49; Ezekiel 24:24; Ezekiel 24:27; Ezekiel 33:29; Ezekiel 33:33).

(2)

26 times God threatens foreign powers with punishment so that they too will know that I am the Lord (Ezekiel 25:5; Ezekiel 25:7; Ezekiel 25:11; Ezekiel 25:14; Ezekiel 25:17; Ezekiel 26:6; Ezekiel 28:22 ff.; Ezekiel 29:6; Ezekiel 29:9; Ezekiel 29:16; Ezekiel 30:8; Ezekiel 30:19; Ezekiel 30:25 f.; Ezekiel 32:15; Ezekiel 35:4; Ezekiel 35:9; Ezekiel 35:12; Ezekiel 35:15; Ezekiel 38:16; Ezekiel 38:23; Ezekiel 39:6 f., Ezekiel 39:21).

(3)

12 times God concluded a promised blessing of Israel whereby they could easily discern God's hand in earthly events and know that I am the Lord (Ezekiel 16:62; Ezekiel 17:24; Ezekiel 28:26; Ezekiel 29:21; Ezekiel 34:27; Ezekiel 34:30; Ezekiel 36:11; Ezekiel 36:38; Ezekiel 37:6; Ezekiel 37:13 f.; Ezekiel 39:28).

(4)

God described the Gentile nations-' punishment so that its realization would convince Israel to know that I the Lord have spoken (Ezekiel 35:11; Ezekiel 39:21 f.).

(5)

God's restoration of Israel must convince Gentiles that Jahweh is the true God of heaven and Israel's God (Ezekiel 36:23; Ezekiel 36:36; Ezekiel 36:38).

GOD'S CLEARLY-DEFINED PATTERN OF SELF-REVELATION IN HISTORY'S EVENTS:

(1)

GOD ANNOUNCED HIS PLANS BEFOREHAND as adequate forewarning, so men could look forward to the realization of what was beyond human power to foresee or forestall (Isaiah 14:26 f; Isaiah 19:12; Isaiah 37:20-37; Isaiah 41:20-29; Isaiah 42:9; Isaiah 45:19 ff; Isaiah 48:14 f.).

(2)

THEN GOD DID WHAT HE SAID HE WOULD (Isaiah 30:30 ff; Isaiah 42:23 ff; Isaiah 44:7 f; Isaiah 48:3; Isaiah 64:1-4).

(3)

Because the news was also to be announced to all nations (Isaiah 48:20), men could draw the correct conclusion: what God says, He will do. His rule is real and His will must be obeyed in other areas too (Isaiah 17:7 f; Isaiah 19:19-25; Isaiah 24:14; Isaiah 43:12 f; Isaiah 45:1-6; Isaiah 45:14; Isaiah 48:3-7; Isaiah 48:16; Isaiah 49:23; Isaiah 49:26; Isaiah 52:6; Isaiah 54:15 ff.).

Thus, God's mighty acts in history were not merely to punish or bless either Israel or the nations, but to lead all men, Jews and Gentiles alike, to confess that Israel's God is the only truly self-existent, eternal, living God, who alone is worthy of adoration and service. Israel was to learn that it was Jahweh who struck them, not merely some pagan foreign power, so they would return to Him (Isaiah 9:13; Jeremiah 5:3). There was no supernatural exhibition of God's person in the skies over Israel or Jerusalem when He poured out His wrath on them. Nevertheless, from the outcome of the events, His people were to draw the necessary conclusion that the LORD HIMSELF directed those remedial chastisements (cf. Joel 2:11). They were to conclude that punishments like the sacking of Jerusalem and the burning of the Temple furnish irrefutable evidence that a great day of the Lord has come. (Cf. Isaiah 2:12-22; Amos 5:18 ff.; Zephaniah 1:7 ff., Zephaniah 1:14 f.; Zechariah 2:2 f.) THIS WAS A CONCLUSION THEY WERE TO DRAW, fore announced indeed by prophets, but not an affirmation written in flaming letters across the sky nor thundered from heaven. This they could DEDUCE as the Babylonian war machine, for example, rolled into the beleaguered Holy City to pillage, slaughter and burn. But this was a CONCLUSION well-grounded in many prophecies that guided Israel to read their destiny aright, even if in the light of the flames that consumed their last hope of reprieve from divine justice. (Cf. Jeremiah 5:19.)

Merely because one cannot discern God's Kingdom materially visible does not constitute proof that it does not exist or has somehow failed. The above-cited references often allude to God's hand stretched out over a given people to punish it. But who seriously believes that a gigantic fist appeared in the sky over them to smash them for their sins? To the contrary, the prophets sometimes indicate which specific, quite earthly enemy power would be God's appointed instrument, be they some great empire or the marauding desert tribes, or even Israel herself (Ezekiel 25:4; Ezekiel 25:14; Ezekiel 26:7; Ezekiel 30:24 f; Ezekiel 32:11 f; Ezekiel 29:19 f.; cf. Jeremiah 51:11; 1 Chronicles 5:26; 1 Chronicles 21:16). In the colossal shifts in imperial power in the ancient Near East God established His sovereignty as Lord of history (Daniel 2:21; Daniel 2:44). This lesson was so clear that even a Nebuchadnezzar could understand it (Daniel 4:3; Daniel 4:34 ff.). On some occasions, because of a direct revelation, earth's monarchs were brought to their knees before God's universal dominion (Daniel 2:47; Daniel 3:28 f; Daniel 4:28-37; Daniel 5:18-21; Daniel 6:25 ff.). At other times God overthrew thrones and established justice despite the evil intentions of the human agents He used. (Cf. Isaiah 10:5-19; Isaiah 10:24 ff.; Isaiah 13:5; Isaiah 14:24-29; Isaiah 30:30 ff.; Isaiah 31:8 f; Isaiah 38:6; Jeremiah 51:20 ff., Jeremiah 51:27 ff.; Micah 4:11 f.). These acts of God were to convince Israel that God's servant, Nebuchadnezzar, for example, was nothing more nor less than God's tool operating at the level of empire (Isaiah 44:28; Jeremiah 25:9-14; Jeremiah 46:10). In Israel or elsewhere only the crass unbeliever could pout, But I expected something different, something more psychologically convincing, some more spectacular evidence of God's reality and sovereignty!

Just as God ruled men from heaven without personally and visibly directing history's traffic from some mountain top, overthrowing thrones and shattering the power of kingdoms (cf. 1 Chronicles 29:11 f.; Haggai 2:2 f.), so everything Jesus was doing was intended to produce the conviction in the dispassionate observer that Jesus Christ is Lord. Jesus followed the same model established by God: He forewarned of Jerusalem's fall. Then He brought it to pass. Thus, men could conclude that the Crucified One sits on the Throne at the center of the universe, that He has indeed come on the clouds of heaven, and shall come again, as He said.

Must His reign seem less real, just because it too is invisible? Can we believe it to function effectively, even if He is not seated on a golden, Davidic throne in Jerusalem (John 18:36)? Merely because we cannot observe His reigning, must we repeat the ancient slander: Is the Lord among us or not (Exodus 17:7)? Proponents of millennial theories that require a messianic throne of David in Jerusalem appear to be dissatisfied with a spiritual kingdom, as if its spiritual character somehow compromises its reality and power. All must learn to live with Jesus-' promise: I will be with you always, to the very close of the age (Matthew 28:20). Rather than confirm His word by appearing bodily after His departure, He sent His Spirit to be with us and in us. Significantly, it was in a context such as Ezekiel's five apologetic defenses mentioned above, that God's promise to send His Spirit arises. So, if God approaches earth to re-organize its inhabitants any way He chooses but needs no visible, material body to accomplish this, why must it be thought strange that Jesus Christ need not appear in the sky before earthly judgments can be wrought on the earth by Him?

NOTE: it is not argued here that Jesus-' vindication at the fall of Jerusalem is the final or exclusive fulfillment of Daniel's great prophecy. Rather, that any time Christ intervenes, either on behalf of His Church or to punish His enemies, He gives proof of His heavenly reign, vindicates His claims and justifies the faith of His people. Every such intervention may be considered evidence of the coming of the Son of man on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory to the Ancient of Days to rule from His throne until that final Day when, what Christians have believed all along, shall finally break in upon the consciousness of all men, and Daniel's prophecy shall have its final, most glorious fulfillment. (Cf. notes on Matthew 10:23 and Matthew 16:28.)

WHO SHALL SEE THE SON OF MAN COMING, AND HOW?

It would seem that, according to Matthew, they will see, must refer exclusively and contextually, to all the tribes (who) mourn, i.e. those of Israel who rejected God's offer of grace through Jesus. But would those who repudiated Jesus-' interpretation of Judaism's fall be psychologically able to admit the Nazarene's complete vindication in the holocaust of 70 A.D.? Although they probably would not grasp this connection, Jesus-' expression admits two possible explanations.

JEWS WOULD SEE WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING. A child watches two expert chess players move their pieces on the board, without its seeing what the moves mean, while the players themselves not only witness but also experience, recognize and understand what each play means in terms of the past, present and possible future of the game. Similarly, Jews would see Jerusalem, the Temple and its millennial glory going up in flames and the demolition of the entire Mosaic institution for access to God through priesthood, sacrifices and cleansing from sin. But what they could see with their mind, or comprehend, must depend on what they were willing to recognize as the meaning of what they saw. (Cf. Isaiah 29:9-12; Isaiah 29:14; Acts 3:17; Acts 13:27.) The extent to which they repented and trusted God to judge righteously measured their openness to His revelations (Isaiah 32:3). Otherwise, they would see without understanding (cf. Matthew 13:11-16; Isaiah 6:9 f; Isaiah 42:18 ff; Isaiah 53:1; contrast Isaiah 52:15; Romans 10:16-19; Hebrews 3:7 to Hebrews 4:2). Their centuries-old Wailing Wall mentality documents their continued incomprehension.

CHRISTIANS WOULD SEE AND UNDERSTAND. They will see, in Matthew, seems to refer contextually to Israel alone. This phrase, however, is used also by both Mark and Luke who make no specific allusion to anyone in particular, since they omitted all mention of the Jews. Further, the third person plural verb in Greek can be used, as in English, for the indefinite subject: one will see, anyone in general will see, you will see, etc. (Cf. Blass-Deburnner, Grammar, §130.) So, Jesus leaves the door open for not only Jews to see, but also Christians. These latter not only witness the awe-inspiring end of Israel's Temple, but also the dramatic conclusion of the Mosaic dispensation and the historical vindication of Jesus of Nazareth. So, what the Jews witnessed uncomprehendingly, the Christians, looking at the same objects, could see in it what Daniel's images portrayed, the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven. Comprehension and true insight were possible only for those who accepted the true meaning of the event as this is perceived on the basis of Jesus-' prediction and the empirically observable occurrence of what He had foretold, interpreting everything in the light of Daniel 7:13 f. Christians could grasp the true significance of the decline and fall of Judaism, because they possess the interpretative key to history, handed them by the Lord of History Himself.

CONCLUSION

The end of the pre-Messianic age and the commencement of the Kingdom of the Messiah coincided theoretically at the Passion, Victory, Ascension and Coronation of the Christ which culminated in Pentecost, 30 A.D. But only a few believersno more than 300 at firstembraced this change of administration for nearly a generation. Business continued as usual in Judaism. This would lead to the falsely secure notion that all was well. But the sudden, definitive removal of Judaism's commonwealth and its Levitical system and Temple became the signal proof that only Jesus of Nazareth had correctly revealed the mind of God (Matthew 24; Mark 13; Luke 21). Thus, the very crumbling of the Jewish commonwealth, their religious center and its aftermath, just as He prophesied, would attest to Jesus-' heavenly reign by His superintending the punitive justice meted out on those who rejected His messiahship and crucified Him, and by His justifying the faith of those who proclaimed Him Lord of all. Both acts of this divine King prove He sits enthroned and rules with power and great glory. They prove that He has truly begun to do, concretely and historically, what Daniel's expressions meant: He has already ascended to heaven and come to God on the clouds of heaven to take His place rightfully on God's throne. Jewish silence that finds inexplicable their Temple's 2000-year desolation is tantamount to a confession that God has incomprehensibly abandoned His people and that Israel today has no solid refutation against the claim that the Crucified One has triumphed and is their true Master, despite the fact that they repudiate His Lordship. No longer may fleshly Israel claim unique or exclusive access to God, because Israel's Bible, in the absence of its Messiah, points uncompromisingly to its Levitical sacrifices by which alone this access may be enjoyed. But now that access is denied by the Temple's millennial absence.

No wonder, then, that in 70 A.D. Christians could lift up their heads in hope (Luke 21:28). Christ's people were freed from the ungodly, oppressive sovereignty of Judaism by the execution of the Lord's sentence on it, because in that event it became evident on earth that Jesus-' kingship is real. The Son of man was really in heaven and He had actually come on the clouds of heaven to the Ancient of Days and was gloriously crowned with honor and sovereign power, just as Daniel had foretold and Jesus Himself had confirmed! Christ in heaven administers His Kingdom, while His people conquer and reign on earth (Revelation 5:10; cf. Revelation 1:6; Romans 8:37; 2 Corinthians 2:14; 1 Peter 2:9).

NOTE: None of the above conclusions are intended to detract from the perfect, final realization of Daniel's prophecy, whereby what is now discerned only by believers shall become indisputably evident to everyone at Christ's coming. Nor does this interpretation deny the clearly literal expectations of many other texts that speak of His return on the Final Day (1 Thessalonians 4:16; 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10; 1 Corinthians 15; 2 Peter 3, etc.). Jesus-' Kingdom became de jure effective at Pentecost (Acts 2), but it was and is only gradually realized de facto as His influence spreads throughout the world and more of His enemies are put under His feet. Even so, there remains a sense in which it is still largely a Kingdom de jure and shall not be manifest to all of earth's inhabitants in all its glory until the Last Day. Christ's present reign is not inconsistent with the continued presence of evil in the world. (See notes on Matthew 13.) Revelation dramatizes the final outcome of this conflict and warns that all present appearances are deceiving that seem to put Christ and Christians-' victory in doubt. He really reigns and His people are victors, even though all earthly observation would deny it. What is even now true shall simply be manifest at the Last Day.

4. Worldwide proclamation of the Gospel and its results: the beginning of the Lord's Year of Jubilee (24:31)

Matthew 24:31 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. This sending forth of angels closely resembles Jesus-' interpretation of His own parables of the Tares and of the Dragnet (Matthew 13:41; Matthew 13:49). Further, the great sound of a trumpet seems associated with the last trumpet call of God at the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:52; 1 Thessalonians 4:16). Notwithstanding these similarities, two considerations suggest that these expressions be otherwise interpreted:

Jesus-' explicit indications of schedule require a fulfillment within the time-frame of His own contemporary generation (Matthew 23:35 f.; Matthew 24:21; Matthew 24:29; Matthew 24:34).

Jesus-' language utilized symbols already well developed in the Old Testament prophets and in the Law, and, as indicated above, although some of the same symbols may also be used in connection with the Second Coming, nevertheless, it is entirely appropriate that He be thought free to adopt this same language in a sense governed by the time limitations He indicated.

His angels (Greek: àngeloi = messengers generally). Whether such messengers are supernatural or completely human must be decided form the context. Besides the many texts which speak of supernatural agents of God, the following texts illustrate the appropriateness of using àngeloi for men: In Matthew 11:10 àngelos refers to John the Baptist (= Mark 1:2; Luke 7:27) whereas in Luke 7:24 àngeloi refers to some of John's disciples. In Luke 9:52 àngeloi refers to emissaries of Jesus. In James 2:25 àngeloi describes two spies sent to Jericho. This evidence indicates that the translators-' choice to render àngeloi with angels in our text unnecessarily attributes supernatural nature to these messengers, and this conclusion may safely be re-examined, since our Lord may well have meant His human messengers of which He had spoken earlier in unliteral language (Matthew 23:34).

With a great sound of a trumpet, as texts like Revelation 8:9 illustrate may have other functions in God's economy besides giving the blast that signals the world's end. The question must ever be asked: what image would Jesus-' Jewish audience have received from this expression? In Israel's millennial history, the trumpet was used to give signals to Israel and call the community together (Exodus 19:13; Exodus 19:16; Exodus 19:19; Numbers 10:1-7). At the New Moon and on other occasions trumpets were used to signal great national celebrations and feasts (Psalms 81:3). Alarms were sounded to warn of approaching danger (Joel 2:1). However, the trumpet's use at Sinai may not have been merely a signal, but part of the very expression of God's presence and glory, and susceptible of being associated with the new covenant announcement of the Law of Christ, not from Sinai, but from Jerusalem. From its many literal uses it symbolic use is drawn, but which one is intended here?

Among its other uses, the trumpet, as a symbol, would bring to the Jewish Jubilee a trumpet song of the emancipation of Hebrew slaves and of the restoration of alienated property to its true owners, and of a year's vacation from life's toil. In this same vein, Jesus established the keynote of His own ministry, citing Isaiah 61:1 f. (Luke 4:18 f.).

The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor, He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight to the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.

Then He claimed, Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing. So doing, He initiated the great spiritual era of freedom, rest and restoration. With His own trumpet blast He announced that the time of deliverance had come. Then, as He sent forth His heralds to proclaim this same dispensation of God's grace now available to all in the Gospel, these messengers (àngeloi) but echoed the Jubilee trumpet's function to proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants.

However, it would appear that Jesus selected a great sound of a trumpet from a figure used by Isaiah 27:13, where God promised to gather His exiled people who were perishing in captivity. Note the comparisons:

JESUS

ISAIAH

The Son of man shall send forth his angels

The Lord will thresh

with a great sound of a trumpet they shall gather his elect

In that day a great trumpet will sound You, O Israelites, will be gathered one by one

from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other

Those who were perishing in Assyria and those who were exiled in Egypt will come and worship the Lord on the holy mountain in Jerusalem.

The only element not mentioned in both texts is his angels, although the passive (you will be gathered in Isaiah) suggests an agent of some kind.

Several points should be noted:

This was no literal trumpet. Rather, because it was already a well-known symbol of Israel's jubilee release, Isaiah seems to have spiritualized the Jubilee trumpet to signal a new epoch of glorious release from bondage to pagan powers.

Even in Isaiah, this trumpet is no merely human signal, but the summons symbolically sounded by God or by His agents (Cf. Isaiah 18:3; Isaiah 11:12), to call penitent exiles back to Jerusalem to resume their worship and service to Him. (Cf. Joel 2:15 f.; Psalms 81:3.)

The trumpet-call would produce a restoration to their original sanctification as the people would thresh out grain and collect the kernels individually in the most careful manner possible into a container, so God would separate the grain, the penitent, from the husks, their ungodly brethren yet living among pagan nations.

Jesus apparently reworked Isaiah's literary image to project the vision of an even more glorious trumpet to publish the year of release, not limited to the Jews or to the land of Palestine, but good tidings of great joy for all peoples. He would inaugurate a Jubilee of return and redemption for all nations, which is His next point.

They shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Again His language strikingly resembles His own mode of describing the Final Judgment (Matthew 13:41-43; Matthew 13:48-50; 2 Thessalonians 1:7 ff.). Nevertheless, this prophetic language appears to have been borrowed from Moses and Zechariah. Surprisingly, nothing actually celestial is alluded to in one end of heaven to the other. In fact, Zechariah (Matthew 2:6) quotes the Lord as calling, Come! Come! Flee from the land of the north, for I have scattered you to the four winds of heaven. This idiom is only natural, since God had promised compassion on the exiles thus:

If any of thine outcasts be in the uttermost parts of heaven, from thence will Jehovah thy God gather thee and from thence will he fetch thee (Deuteronomy 30:4, ASV).

What is meant less figuratively is their restoration from banishment to the most distant land under the heavens (Deuteronomy 30:4, NIV). It is everywhere assumed that these would be flesh-and-blood exiles walking on earth, not disembodied spirits floating in from some distant point in space. (Cf. Nehemiah 1:9.)

Borrowing this prophetic terminology, Jesus could depict the sounding of the Gospel proclamation which would gather the true Israel of God from the far reaches of the world and unite them in the worship of Jehovah in. the real and abiding Zion (the church), not the earthly and passing Jerusalem (Butler, Isaiah, II, 54). The messengers (àngeloi) of Christ are commissioned to go into all the world, making disciples of all the nations (Matthew 28:19 f.), a process which proposes to gather God's Elect, His Church, from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. (Cf. Matthew 8:11; Luke 13:29.) Our Gospel proclaims deliverance and redemption from the oppressive slavery to sin, available to every creature (Mark 16:15). This liberation encapsules the profoundest meaning of Jubilee. God's elect are no longer drawn from one small nation, but are composed of people from every tribe, nation, people and tongue. This text, then, points to the grand, non-national, worldwide character of the New Israel and how it came to be.

So, when did the trumpet actually sound: during the ministry of Christ (Luke 4:17 ff.)? with the Gospel proclamation of the acceptable year of the Lord, as Jesus-' messengers went through the land sounding the Gospel trumpet of release from bondage to Satan? or with the destruction of Jerusalem which formally and finally announced the final end of the Old Dispensation? Ideally, all three, because what occurred in the Gospel preaching by the early Christians and what took place at Jerusalem in 70 A.D. was nothing but the extension of the royal authority and ministry of Jesus Himself. To the world these mighty acts announced Gospel redemption. Also our slavery to Judaistic legalism was now surpassed by a Gospel for every man and people which proclaims liberation to everyone. This fact became concretely obvious when the last vestiges of the Old Dispensation indisputably crumbled to the ground in flames. But it is not impossible that the final Trumpet (1 Thessalonians 4:16), while presumably literal, may be but the last, most glorious expression of God's merciful trumpet to publish eternal release, restoration and redemption. (Study Leviticus 25; Zechariah 14, esp. Zechariah 14:16 ff.)

WHEN TRAGIC EVENTS ARE ACTUALLY REASSURING

Now when these things begin to take place, look up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near (Luke 21:28). Jesus introduces these words to conclude this section and yet their meaning is echoed in the parable of the trees which follows, and to which this verse serves as introduction. This verse, then, looks both ways:

It prepares the mind to hear Jesus say, When you see all these things taking place, you can tell that the kingdom of God is near. You will live to see it.

It summarizes what the believing observer is to decide about the tremendous, earth-shaking events Jesus has just described in the previous verses, which must mean exclusively the destruction of Jerusalem. That Jesus is not here alluding to the Second Coming is clear

Because when these things begin to take place implies a certain gradualness that permits time for reflection on the world events just described (Luke 21:25 f.). But the Second Coming will be marked by an unexpected, unpredictable suddenness (Matthew 24:39; Matthew 24:42; Matthew 24:44; Matthew 25:13).

Because Look up and raise your heads, when referred to the Second Coming, is also meaningless, for Christ's return will be announced by heavenly shouting, trumpet music and Jesus-' own glorious, personal appearance (1 Thessalonians 4:16). It will all be so obvious as to require no special announcements (Matthew 24:23 ff.) or hopeful searching the skies. His appearance will be instantly visible to all; His voice audible to all (2 Thessalonians 1:7-10; John 5:28).

Because the expression, your redemption is drawing near, cannot allude to eternal redemption, since this would give time for lastminute preparation. But such convenient, last-minute repentance is absolutely excluded by Jesus-' warnings (Matthew 25:1-13). Universal repentance and consequent salvation is inconceivable (Luke 18:8; Matthew 7:13-14; 1 Peter 4:12-19). That eternal redemption from sin and all its consequences (1 Peter 1:5-9; Romans 8:23) is not here envisioned is evident from the contextual consideration that Jesus is merely discussing the post-Jewish dispensation when the Gospel would be proclaimed among the Gentiles and the universal Church vindicated as the earthly expression of God's Kingdom. So, redemption, here, refers to the near approach to the Church's liberation by those earthly events which would signal the arrival of Christ's Kingdom (Luke 21:31 = Matthew 24:33).

Jesus-' meaning, then, is, When these things, the earth-shaking events leading up to my heavenly vindication, begin to take place, you, my dear disciples, may then look up and raise your heads bowed down by the severe troubles you suffer at that time, because your redemption from the limitations imposed by the Jewish period of the Church and your liberation from persecution by Jewish authorities is drawing near.

HOW JUSTIFY THIS POSITION TAKEN?

While we may be satisfied that this passage makes primary reference to the vindication of Jesus as God's Messiah when the Father furnished convincing proof of Jesus-' Lordship and of the justice of His cause during the period immediately successive to the fall of Jerusalem and as a necessary result of this judgment, nevertheless it would be irresponsible to ignore the many striking similarities which other commentators notice between Jesus-' language here and what, in my view, are genuinely end-of-the-world events.

The astronomical panorama of changes in our universe (2 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 3:10; 2 Peter 3:12). The creation of new heavens and earth (2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1-5; cf. Revelation 6:12 f.).

The appearance of Jesus Christ in the sky (1 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 2:19; 1 Thessalonians 3:13; 2 Thessalonians 2:8; 2 Timothy 4:1; Titus 2:13).

The mourning of those who rejected the truth, the terror of those shaken by the glory of our returning Lord, terrified by the prospect of their damnation (Revelation 6:12-17; cf. Revelation 1:7?).

The loud trumpet signaling the end, Christ's return and the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:52; 1 Thessalonians 4:16; cf. Revelation 11:15).

The angels sent forth to gather Christ's elect from all over the earth (Matthew 13:41-43; Matthew 13:48-50; 2 Thessalonians 1:7 ff.).

How explain these remarkable similarities? Does similarity argue identification or that this entire paragraph (Matthew 24:29-31) should be understood exclusively with reference to the Second Coming? While the parallels are many and remarkable, their origin in Old Testament prophetic language warns against strict literalism. On the other hand, we may be perfectly content if our marvelous Lord chooses to bring every one of these prophecies to a surprising, literal fulfillment. However, on what basis can prophecies that refer primarily to events immediately following Jerusalem's fall, be thought to point also to the world's Last Day?

One answer is to see in the definitive judgment upon Judaism a symbol foreshadowing the sentencing of the entire world. Thus, while others are mistaken to see only end-of-the-world events in the foreground of Jesus-' picture before Matthew 24:34, nevertheless it is thought that there may be principles involved here that have a wider application that would extend to Christians living on earth after that event until Jesus comes again. The major objection to this view is the repeated warning of our Lord that, whereas the fall of Jerusalem would be preceded by unmistakable signs of its impending disaster, the coming of Christ and the world's end will not. The nearness of that Day will be undiscernible in every respect (Matthew 24:36, Matthew 24:42 ff., Matthew 24:50; Matthew 25:13; Mark 13:33; Mark 13:35; Luke 21:34). Therefore, what is the purpose of searching for parallels and similarities? At this critical point the two events are not at all similar.

Another approach is to recognize in Matthew 24:29-31 a symbolic panorama of earthly events depicted in typical apocalyptic language coined by and borrowed from the prophets, but which, while having undoubted fulfillment in Jerusalem's demise, may yet occur in all their cosmic literalness at the Lord's return. These cosmic disturbances are characteristic of the theophanies of both history and prophecy of the Old Testament, so why should they not also serve in New Testament history and prophecy as well? Although these suggestions cannot be ruled out categorically, enough evidence has been offered in the verse comments to indicate that Jesus spoke in a meaningful language to people familiar with His terminology. Correct exegesis, therefore, must proceed from the standpoint of what the prophets meant by language which Jesus utilized to communicate His own revelations to minds saturated with His Bible.

Because nothing is lost for the Second Coming, it is simply better to consider Matthew 24:29-31 as expressing the theological results of the end of the Jewish era, leaving the above-mentioned texts free to teach us about Christ's real coming, without our seeking some clue in Matthew 24 to the date of the Parousia when the Lord flatly denied any possible hope of success.

FACT QUESTIONS

Define the tribulation of those days. To what days does Jesus refer by those days? How had He defined those days earlier? (Matthew 24:19-22). Identify the tribulation itself: what is a tribulation?

In what sense is the Coming of the Son of man to be immediately after the tribulation of those days? How could all the majestic events Jesus included in this paragraph (Matthew 24:29 ff.) really occur immediately after the crises of the tribulation?

Locate the Old Testament passages where the following expressions are used and give the interpretation intended by the Old Testament author in each case:

The sun shall be darkened, the moon shall not give her light, the stars shall fall from heaven, the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.

All the tribes of the earth shall mourn. To what tribes does the prophet refer? To what earth? What occasioned their mourning?

The Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory: to what or whom was this Son of man coming when He approached on the clouds of heaven in the original reference?

gather. a great trumpet: what was this trumpet used for in the original reference(s)?

the four winds of heaven.

Now, rewrite Jesus-' paragraph using the literal meaning of each phrase as you have gleaned it from the Old Testament prophets. That is, take His figurative language borrowed from the Prophets, and, as if you were writing for people unfamiliar with the Old Testament, express His literal meaning which would have been communicated to His original Jewish hearers familiar with the Old Testament.

Establish with good reasons to what coming of the Son of man Jesus alludes.

True or false? The better translation is All the tribes of the land (not earth) shall mourn. Defend your answer.

What additional information does Luke add that helps to interpret this section?

Continues after advertising