The Olivet Discourse (part 2 of 2)

Part 1: https://thechristianuniversalist.blogspot.com/2023/08/the-olivet-discourse-part-1-of-2.html

    In the previous post, based on careful exegesis of the Olivet Discourse and its surrounding context, we determined that it must have been fulfilled in the first century, specifically in the events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. Now we must examine the specific predictions made in this discourse to see if they were fulfilled in the first century. If not, then all our previous exegesis is invalidated, and the Olivet Discourse is yet to be fulfilled in the future. But if these prophecies do find a convincing fulfillment in the past, then this confirms that the Olivet Discourse deals with the events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem, and not the future Second Coming.

    The Discourse

    At the beginning of the Olivet Discourse, the disciples ask Jesus questions about the timing of the destruction of the Temple, and “the sign” that will precede it (Matt. 24:3; Mark 13:3, 4; Luke 21:7). These questions and their significance were discussed in the previous section of this paper. After they ask him these questions, Jesus responds:

“Take heed that no one mislead you, for many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and will mislead many.” (Matt. 24:4-5)

    In my earlier posts titled “Refuting Preterism”, I argued that there were no other Messianic claimants in the first century, and so this prophecy could not refer to the time preceding AD 70. However, I now think that this interpretation is indefensible. If Jesus immediately began by talking about the events preceding his Second Coming, this would leave the disciples’ questions about the Temple’s destruction completely unanswered.

    As it happens, there were many false Messiahs in the first century preceding the destruction of the Temple. Josephus refers to numerous Jewish religious leaders who stirred up revolts in Judea between AD 30 and 70, many of whom claimed to be prophets empowered by God, some of whom had royal aspirations. [1] He spoke of this period as a time when “the country was again filled with robbers and imposters, who deceived the many” (Antiquities 20.8.5). Although Josephus did not refer to these “imposters” as Messiahs, this is no surprise, since he only used the title “Christ” once in his writings (Antiquities 20.9.1). [2] Therefore, Jesus’ prediction about false Messiahs indeed applies to the period preceding the fall of Jerusalem.

“You will then hear of wars and rumors of wars. But see, do not be troubled; for this must take place, but it is not yet the end. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in places. Yet all these are the beginning of agonies.” (Matt. 24:6-8)

    In my “Refuting Preterism” posts, I argued that this could not apply to the pre-AD 70 period, since the Roman Empire was governed by the pax Romana. However, I failed to note that although there were no wars within the Empire, Rome was actually at war with the Parthian Empire during AD 58-63. Moreover, there was civil war throughout the Empire during the Year of the Four Emperors (AD 68-69), as well as the First Jewish-Roman War itself, which began in AD 66. These could easily qualify as the “wars and rumors of wars” which would take place before “the end” (AD 70). [3] Indeed, such wars would have been much more notable during the pax Romana period than today.

    As for famines, one famine which occurred “over all the inhabited world” is recorded in Acts 11:28. This Empire-wide famine is also described by Josephus and Tacitus, who relates that it was so severe that Rome itself had only enough provisions for fifteen days at one point. [4] Likewise, an earthquake is recorded in Acts 16:26, and many others during AD 30-70 are described in contemporary records. [5] Luke’s account adds that there will be “terrible sights and great signs from heaven,” which aligns with the numerous rare cosmic phenomena that took place during this time, as reported by Josephus, who says that the signs “foreshadowed the desolation that was coming upon [Israel]” (Wars 4.4.5; 6.5.3).

    All three synoptic accounts state, “do not be troubled; for this must take place, but it is not yet the end” (Matt. 24:6; Mark 13:7; Luke 21:9). This implies that these “beginning of agonies” (Matt. 24:8) are not specific signs that would precede the destruction of the Temple, but events that will occur throughout that period, which should not worry believers. [6] Deceitful charismatic leaders, wars, famines, and earthquakes have existed since time immemorial, and will continue to exist until Jesus’ return. Thus, although these things did take place in the first century, it’s a mistake to try to correlate them to specific events that preceded AD 70.

“At that time they will hand you over to persecution and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations because of my name. Many will stumble, and betray one another, and hate one another, and many false prophets will arise and mislead many. And because of the increase of lawlessness, the love of many will grow cold.” (Matt. 24:9-12)

    The Greek conjunction tote (“at that time”) at the beginning of v. 9 means that Jesus must still be describing first-century events. The Markan and Lukan accounts add more detail, stating that people will betray their own families, and believers will appear before kings and governors to testify. This very accurately matches the Jewish persecutions described in the book of Acts. [7] Furthermore, during the reign of Nero, the first organized persecution of Christians took place, in Rome itself as well as the other provinces (Tacitus, Annals 15.44; Orosius, Seven Books Against the Pagans 7.7).

“Yet the one who endures to the end will be saved. And the gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed in the whole inhabited world, as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.” (Matt. 24:13-14)

    “The end” (Gk: to telos) in v. 13 may refer back to “the completion of the age” (Gk: sunteleia tou aiōnios) in the disciples’ second question (Matt. 24:3). However, the term telos is more ambiguous than the technical phrase sunteleia tou aiōnios (“completion of the age”) which is found in v. 3; therefore, it may simply refer to the end of persecution, rather than the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 (cf. Matt. 10:22). In contrast, “the end” in v. 14 likely does refer to the fall of Jerusalem, because the alternative (“the end” of the gospel of the kingdom) is quite unlikely.

    One superficial difficulty with this reading is that “the gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed in the whole entire world as a testimony to all nations” does not seem to fit the events before AD 70. However, this ‘difficulty’ involves an overly-literal reading of the text. The Greek word oikoumenē (“inhabited world”) does not refer to the entire earth, but the world known to the New Testament authors, which is the Roman Empire. [8] According to Paul, the gospel had been preached to “all nations” and “the whole world” (Gk: panti tō kosmō) by the time of his imprisonment (Rom. 10:18; 16:26; Col. 1:6). Therefore, the gospel was indeed proclaimed to the whole oikoumenē prior to AD 70. [9]

“Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in a holy place — let the reader understand — then let those in Judea flee to the hills. Let not the one on the housetop descend to take anything out of his house; and let not the one in the field turn back to take his cloak. But woe to those who are pregnant and nursing in those days! Now pray that your flight may not be in winter, or on the Sabbath.” (Matt. 24:15-20)

“Now when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, know that her desolation is near. At that time, let those in Judaea flee to the mountains, and let those in her midst depart, and do not let those in the countryside enter into her; for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that has been written. But woe to those who are pregnant and nursing in those days! For there will be great distress upon the Land and wrath to this people. They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all nations, and Jerusalem will be trodden down by Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” (Luke 21:20-24) 

    The “abomination of desolation” (bdelugma tēs erēmōseōs) is a term which refers to the pagan desecration of the Jewish Temple. This happened for the first time in the second century BC, during the reign of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who set up an altar to Jupiter within the temple (Dan. 11:31; 1 Macc. 1:54). It also took place in August AD 66, when Roman troops stormed the Temple, stole money out of its treasury, and slaughtered thousands of Jews. [10] According to later Christian historians, the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem fled to the surrounding area at this time, fulfilling Jesus’ warning to flee. [11]

   The description of the siege in the Olivet Discourse very accurately describes the first-century siege of Jerusalem. In any normal siege, it would be far too late to flee by the time that the city is “surrounded by armies” (Luke 21:20). However, when Jerusalem was first surrounded by Roman troops in November AD 66, the Romans shortly thereafter “retired from the city, without any reason in the world” (Wars 2.19.7). Furthermore, when the Romans began to besiege Jerusalem in late AD 68, they retreated again due to the civil war that engulfed the Roman Empire at that time (Wars 4.9.2). This would have given the Jewish Christians in the city ample time to flee, and later historians confirm that they did. [11]

“For at that time there will be great distress, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall be. And if those days had not been shortened, then no one would be saved; but for the sake of the elect, those days will be shortened.” (Matt. 24:21-22)

    Because of the Greek conjunction tote (“at that time”) in v. 21, this must be referring to the same period as the earlier prophecy, namely the fall of Jerusalem. But if that’s the case, how can Jesus say that the distress will be greater than anything before or after? Verse 21 is sometimes taken to be an allusion to Dan. 12:1, but it is certainly not a direct quotation. [12] Instead, this is standard apocalyptic language, which is also found in Joel 2:2 and the apocryphal writings 1QM 1.11-12 and Testament of Moses 8.1. [13] The unspeakable atrocities committed against the Jewish people during the Siege of Jerusalem are certainly worthy of this hyperbolic description. [14]

    What about Jesus’ claim that “no flesh would have been saved” if the days of Israel’s distress had not been shortened? Since the immediate context (Matt. 24:15-20) establishes that this passage is referring to the AD 70 fall of Jerusalem, it’s not necessary to take Jesus’ statement as a claim that no flesh on the entire earth would have survived. Rather, it could just as easily be taken to mean that no flesh in Jerusalem, or in Judea, would have survived had those days not been shortened. This is certainly conceivable given the atrocities of the Romans against the Jews during this time, and the fact that 1.1 million people died in the city during the siege (Wars 6.9.3).

    Notably, Josephus uses almost the same terms as Matt. 24:21-22 in describing the siege of Jerusalem. According to his account, “neither did any other city ever suffer such miseries, nor did any age ever breed a generation more fruitful in wickedness than this was from the beginning of the world” (Wars 5.10.5). Furthermore,

had the Romans made any longer delay in coming against those villains, the city would either have been swallowed up by the ground opening upon them, or been overflowed by water, or else been destroyed by such thunder as the country of Sodom perished by, for it had brought forth a generation of men much more atheistical than were those that suffered such punishments; for by their madness it was that all the people came to be destroyed. (Wars 5.13.6)

Therefore, Jesus’ statements that the distress would be greater than any other time, and that no one would have been saved if it had been any longer, were certainly accurate (if hyperbolic) statements about the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70.

“At that time, if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There!’ do not believe it. For there will arise false Messiahs and false prophets, and they will give great signs and wonders so as to mislead even the elect, if possible. Behold, I have forewarned you. Therefore, if they say to you, ‘Behold, he is in the wilderness!’ do not go forth; or, ‘Behold, in the inner rooms!’ do not believe it. For just as the lightning flashes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the arrival of the Son of Man.” (Matt. 24:23-27)

    Many commentators interpret this passage to mean that Jesus’ coming will be visible to all, which means that it refers to the Second Coming and not the fall of Jerusalem. [15] It is quite possible to interpret Jesus’ words in this way; he might be saying that his disciples should not believe anyone who claims that Jesus is present in a secret location, because his coming will be visible to all. However, it’s also possible to interpret Jesus as saying that his parousia will not be a bodily coming, but instead a sudden and one-time event like a flash of lightning. [16] Interestingly, “from the east... [to] the west” was the direction that the Roman troops rapidly moved through Judaea. [17]

    Furthermore, the use of tote (“at that time”) in v. 23 belies the possibility that vv. 23-27 could refer to the Second Coming. This conjunction demonstrates that the warning of vv. 23-27 must refer to the same period as the events of vv. 15-22 (and Luke 21:20-24), which very accurately describe the first-century siege(s) of Jerusalem. Therefore, the “coming of the Son of Man” in v. 27 cannot be the Second Coming, but rather the same “coming” referred to in Matt. 24:3, 30 which coincides with the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple.

“Wherever the corpse is, there the eagles will gather.” (Matt. 24:28)

    The meaning of this verse has been long debated, and many different interpretations have been suggested. [18] However, in my opinion, the reference to “eagles” (aetoi) would have been understood by any first-century Jew as a metaphor for Roman military troops, which always carried an eagle standard. [19] The gathering of eagles around a corpse, therefore, should be understood as the Roman army gathering around ‘dead’ Jerusalem (cf. Matt. 8:22) during its siege in AD 70. According to Josephus, the city was indeed surrounded by Roman eagle standards during its siege (Wars 5.2.1), literally fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy.

“Now immediately after the distress of those days, the sun will be darkened, the moon will not give its light, the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.” (Matt. 24:29)

    Since these heavenly events did not literally occur in AD 70, futurist commentators argue that it must refer to the future Second Coming. However, these signs are said to occur “immediately [eutheōs] after the distress of those days,” which precludes a major shift in time. Rather than viewing these as literal signs in heaven, we should see them as apocalyptic language referring to the fall of Jerusalem, which is God’s judgment on Israel. Consider the following texts which use similar language:

“For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light, the sun will be darkened in its rising, and the moon will not shed its light... Therefore I will make the heavens shake, and the earth will move out of its place at the wrath of Yahweh of hosts and the day of His fierce anger.” (Isaiah 13:10, 13)

“I looked on the earth, and it was complete chaos, and to the heavens, and they had no light.” (Jer. 4:23)

“When I extinguish you, I will cover the heavens and make its stars dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon will not give its light.” (Ezek. 32:7)

“...the sun will suddenly begin to shine at night, and the moon during the day. Blood will drip from wood, and the stone will utter its voice, the peoples will be troubled, and the sky will be changed.” (4 Ezra 5:4-5)

The first three texts are biblical texts describing God’s judgment on Babylon (539 BC), Judah (587 BC), and Egypt (6th century BC) respectively. The fourth text is particularly interesting, because although it is not a biblical text, it is a Jewish ex eventu (after the fact) prophecy of Jerusalem’s destruction, dating to about AD 100. [20] Notably, 4 Ezra uses similar apocalyptic language as Matt. 24:29 to describe the AD 70 fall of Jerusalem. What all of these texts have in common is that they describe God’s judgment upon a nation. Therefore, when Jesus uses this language, we should understand him to be describing God’s judgment on Israel, not literal signs in heaven.

“And at that time, the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and at that time, all the tribes of the land will mourn, and will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” (Matt. 24:30)

    The use of tote (“at that time”) twice in this verse shows that it must still refer to the fall of Jerusalem. “The sign of the Son of Man” (Gk: to sēmeion tou huiou tou anthropou) is very likely the answer to the disciples’ question about “the sign” (Gk: to sēmeion) that would precede the destruction of the Temple (Matt. 24:3; Mark 13:4; Luke 21:7). Exactly what this “sign” refers to is debated, but it may refer to any of the heavenly signs that Josephus says preceded the fall of Jerusalem (Wars 6.5.3). Alternatively, it may not be a literal sign in heaven, but rather the ‘signs’ of v. 29, which symbolize national judgment (see above).

    “All the tribes of the Land will mourn” is an allusion to Zech. 12:10-14, which describes how the people of Israel will mourn at the arrival of the Messiah “whom they pierced”. However, this passage is being re-applied to describe the Israelites’ mourning at the destruction of their city and temple. [21] Although some have argued that “all the tribes of the Land” refers to everyone on the planet, this is not in line with the use of the word phulē (“tribe”) elsewhere in the New Testament, nor the original passage (Zech. 12:10-14) which refers solely to the land of Israel. [22]

    “The Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven” is equated by futurist commentators with the Second Coming. However, as demonstrated earlier, this is a quotation of Dan. 7:13-14, which describes the ‘coming’ of the Messiah to God to receive power and glory and judgment, and alludes to Yahweh’s cloud-comings in the Old Testament which symbolize judgment (Psa. 18:7-15; Isa. 19:1; Nah. 1:2-6). Therefore, the cloud-coming of the Son of Man in v. 30 does not refer to Jesus’ bodily return to earth, but to the enthronement of Jesus and his judgment upon Israel which took place in AD 70.

“And he will send his messengers with a great trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.” (Matt. 24:31)

    This verse draws upon the text of Isaiah 27:13, which states that “the great trumpet shall be blown” and elect believers from around the world will gather at Jerusalem to worship God. Elsewhere in the New Testament, we are told that God has rejected physical Jerusalem in favor of heavenly Jerusalem, of which all believers are citizens (Gal. 4:24-30; Heb. 12:18, 22). Elsewhere, the imagery of gathering is used to describe evangelization (Matt. 12:30; Luke 11:23; John 11:52; cf. Heb. 10:25). Therefore, this ‘gathering’ is already ongoing, and does not require a future fulfillment at the Second Coming. In this verse, “his messengers” might refer to either human or angelic messengers; either way, this interpretation is not ruled out.

    In summary, the statements found in Matt. 24:29-31 (and in Mark 13:24-27; Luke 21:25-28) should not necessarily be seen as a description of the eschatological parousia of Jesus. Rather, in these verses, Jesus draws upon the apocalyptic language of the Old Testament prophets to describe God’s rejection and judgment of false Israel, and His acceptance of the believing remnant of true Israel (cf. Rom. 11). The loss of the temple would seem like a terrible disaster, but ultimately would be a fulfillment of God’s will, and would not interfere with the salvation of true Israel.

“Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. But about that day and hour, no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Matt. 24:34, 36)

    Having answered the disciples’ question about “the sign” preceding the Temple’s destruction (Matt. 24:30; cf. 24:3), Jesus now turns to answer their first question, “When will these things take place?” His answer is that it will take place before “this generation” passes away, but the exact day and hour cannot be known. Elsewhere in the synoptic gospels, “this generation” always refers to Jesus’ contemporaries, not a generation in the distant future (Matt. 12:41, 42, 45; 23:36; Mark 8:12; Luke 7:31; 11:29-32, 50, 51; 17:25; Acts 2:40). Therefore, as argued earlier, Jesus believed that the events of the Olivet Discourse would take place within the first century.

    “Heaven and earth will pass away” most likely does not refer to the destruction of the physical heavens and earth. In the Old Testament, God’s covenant with Israel was described symbolically as heaven and earth (Isa. 51:16), and the first exile of Israel was figuratively the ‘destruction’ of heaven and earth (Isa. 51:6; Jer. 4:23, 28). [23] The second exile of Israel which began in AD 70 could therefore also be called the ‘passing away’ of heaven and earth. The authors of the New Testament looked forward to the renewal of the physical creation, not its destruction (Acts 3:21; Rom. 8:19-21). Thus, whenever the New Testament talks about heaven and earth passing away or being destroyed (e.g., Matt. 5:18; 2 Pet. 3:10), it likely refers to the end of the Old Covenant and the AD 70 exile of Israel, not the destruction of the physical creation.

“For as the days of Noah were, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in the days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day Noah entered the ark, and they knew nothing until the flood came and swept them all away, so, too, will be the coming of the Son of Man. Then two will be in the field; one will be taken, and one will be left. Two women will be grinding meal together; one will be taken, and one will be left. Keep awake, therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord is coming.

“But understand this: if the owner of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into. Therefore you also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect.” (Matt. 24:37-44)

    As shown earlier, “the coming of the Son of Man” does not refer to Jesus’ bodily Second Coming, but the coming of the Messiah to God to receive power and glory and judgment (Dan. 7:9-14). This took place at the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple, when corrupt Israel was judged and the era of the Old Covenant ended.

    But how was this “as the days of Noah”? Some commentators believe that this refers to the wickedness of Noah’s generation (cf. Gen. 6:5), but the actions mentioned here (“eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage”) are not inherently evil. Rather, the emphasis is on the fact that life continued as usual until the flood “swept them all away,” because they did not know when the flood would come. Likewise, no one could know the exact day or hour of the fall of Jerusalem (v. 36), so the disciples are exhorted to remain watchful at all times (vv. 42-44).

    Many lay Christians believe that “one will be taken, and one will be left” (vv. 40, 41) describes the ‘pre-tribulational Rapture,’ largely because of the 1970s song “I Wish We’d All Been Ready.” However, virtually all biblical scholars, including futurist pre-tribulationist scholars, are agreed that this does not describe the Rapture. [24] The context is “the days of Noah,” in which those who were “taken” were killed in the flood (v. 39). Thus, Jesus is saying that the judgment at “the coming of the Son of Man” will be so severe that about one in every two people will succumb to it. This is accurate, as according to Josephus, 1.1 million out of more than 2.7 million people died during the siege of Jerusalem (Wars 6.9.3).

    The Sheep and the Goats

    The main section of the Olivet Discourse ends with the exhortation to keep alert, because the day of the coming of the Son of Man is unknown. This is where the Markan and Lukan accounts end the discourse. However, the Matthean account adds a series of parables which further illustrate the point. The first three of these parables further deal with the exhortation to keep alert. Jesus makes a distinction between the “faithful slave,” the “five wise virgins,” and the “good and trustworthy slave” who remained alert and were rewarded, and the “wicked slave,” the “five foolish virgins,” and the “wicked and lazy slave” who did not remain alert and were judged with the rest (Matt. 24:45-25:30). This aligns with the perspective of the Hebraist, who says that those who return from New Covenant to Old Covenant Judaism have a “fearful prospect of judgment and furious fire” (Heb. 10:26-31).

    The fourth parable, however, is very different from the others, and is often referred to as “the Sheep and the Goats” because of the analogy which Jesus uses (Matt. 25:33). In this passage, Jesus states:

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, and he will put the sheep at his right hand and the goats at the left. Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world’… Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘You who are accursed, depart from me into the eonian fire prepared for the slanderer and his messengers’… And these will go away into eonian punishment, but the righteous into eonian life.” (Matt. 25:31-34, 41, 46)

The key to understanding this passage is to recognize that the imagery of ‘separating sheep from goats’ is used in regard to judgment only one other time in Scripture, in Ezekiel 34:17-24, where it is a judgment of believing and unbelieving Israelites that is in view. Likewise, in Zech. 10:2-3, the false teachers of Israel are described as “male goats” whom God will “punish.” This strongly suggests that Jesus has in view a judgment on unbelieving Israel, and especially the corrupt Jewish leadership.

    Furthermore, Jesus says that this judgment will occur “when the Son of Man... will sit on the throne of his glory”. The New Testament states that the Son of Man “came on the clouds” to be enthroned at God’s right hand on two separate occasions: first, at his exaltation (Matt. 26:64; Acts 2:29-36), and again at the AD 70 judgment (Matt. 24:30). As no judgment took place when Jesus was exalted to heaven, this judgment must have taken place at Jesus’ second enthronement in AD 70, in which case the judgment may be equated with the fall of Jerusalem.

    The difficulty with this interpretation is that Jesus says that “all nations will be gathered before him,” which suggests that it is Gentiles who are being judged. However, elsewhere in the Olivet discourse, Jesus speaks of “all nations” to refer to representatives of all nations — after all, it is not true that every single Gentile heard the gospel or hated Christians before AD 70, although “all nations” did (Matt. 24:9, 14; cf. Rom. 10:18). Moreover, the Jewish Diaspora was said to comprise “all nations” when they were gathered in Jerusalem for the Passover (Acts 2:5-11). According to Josephus, the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 began on Passover, and millions of Diaspora Jews were there (Wars 5.3.1; 6.9.3), so the inhabitants of Jerusalem during the siege could indeed be called “all nations.”

    At the time that the Old Covenant passed away, the kingdom of God would finally be received by Christians with full force (Luke 21:31, 32; Heb. 12:26-28); for the nature of the kingdom of God, see Romans 14:17. This took place “at the conclusion of the age” in AD 70, when Jesus was enthroned a second time (Matt. 24:30). Therefore, it was at this time that Christians “inherit[ed] the kingdom prepared for [them] from the foundation of the world” (Matt. 25:34). In contrast, the unbelieving Jews were punished with “eonian fire” at this time. [25] The fire is said to be prepared for “the devil and his angels” (Gk: tō diabolō kai tois angelois autou), but “devil” (Gk: diabolos) and “angel” (Gk: angelos) can both be used to describe human slanderers and messengers. [26] In this case, it likely refers to the slanderous high priest and his followers (cf. Matt. 26:3-5).

    What about the “eonian punishment” and “eonian life” in v. 46? These are typically translated as “eternal punishment” and “eternal life.” However, the adjective aiōnios derives from the noun aiōn (“age”), and is used dozens of times in the LXX to describe temporal things such as the Old Covenant. [27] Notably, in the prophecies of Jeremiah, the 70-year exile is often referred to as aiōnios (LXX 18:16; 23:40; 25:9). After AD 70, the Jewish people were exiled from their homeland for nearly 2,000 years, which certainly qualifies as aiōnios. Moreover, “eonian life” (Gk: zōē aiōnia) refers to the “life of the Age” [28], and the Old Covenant age was replaced by the New Covenant age in AD 70 (Matt. 24:3; cf. Heb. 8:13).

    In summary, the judgment in Matt. 25:31-46 is not a description of the final judgment, but depicts the Israelite people as sheep and goats (cf. Ezek. 34:17-24; Zech. 10:2-3). The Diaspora from “all nations” was gathered in Jerusalem during the AD 70 siege, and the Jewish unbelievers and false teachers there were punished with fire, while the Jewish believers were saved to Pella and received the spiritual blessings of the kingdom with full force. This aligns with the AD 70 theme of the Olivet discourse (Matt. 24:1-3), as Jesus did not finish saying “all these things” until Matt. 26:1 (cf. 24:34).

    Conclusion

    The Olivet Discourse, described in Matt. 24-25, Mark 13, and Luke 21, is crucial to understanding New Testament eschatology. This discourse describes the events surrounding the destruction of the Temple, the “coming” of Jesus in AD 70, and the end of the Old Covenant age (Matt. 24:3; Mark 13:4; Luke 21:7). According to Jesus, the events prophesied in the Olivet Discourse were fulfilled in the first century, before his contemporaries passed away, although the day and the hour could not have been known beforehand (Matt. 24:34-36). Therefore, the whole discourse must have been fulfilled in the events surrounding the AD 70 fall of Jerusalem, which was of great redemptive-historical significance, as it destroyed the last physical vestiges of the Old Covenant.

    A careful study of all of the events prophesied in the discourse shows that they were indeed fulfilled in the first century, during the period leading up to and culminating in the fall of Jerusalem. The match between the prophesied events and the historical account given by the first-century historian Josephus is nothing short of remarkable. This seems to confirm that the Olivet Discourse predicts first-century events, not future events to take place prior to Jesus’ Second Coming.

    What about the possibility of double fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse? There is no biblical indication that these events will take place again, and Jesus specifically limits the fulfillment of “all these things” to “this generation.” Although it is technically possible that the events in the discourse will happen a second time, it is vain speculation to say that they will. Therefore, we should not look for a future fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse, but rather consider the implications of its past fulfillment, as I will do in my next blog post.

______________________________

[1] Josephus, Antiquities 18.4.1; 20.5.1, 8.5-6; Wars 4.9.3ff.

[2] This was likely because he didn’t want to offend his Roman patrons by referring to the Jewish prophecy of a future ruler who would end all earthly powers (including Rome); see R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 902.

[3] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 903.

[4] Josephus, Antiquities 20.5.2; Tacitus, Annals 12.43.

[5] W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, Matthew 19-28 (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 341 n. 87; R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 904. For specific examples see Josephus, Wars 1.19.3; 4.4.5; Tacitus, Annals 14.27.

[6] Jeffrey A. Gibbs, Jerusalem and Parousia, 181; R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 902.

[7] Acts 4:1-22; 5:1-11, 17-42; 6:1-8:3; 9:1-2, 13-16, 23-24; 12:1-19; 13:44, 50; 14:4-7, 19-20; 15:1-2; 16:19-40; 17:5-9, 13, 32; 18:12-17; 19:9, 23-41; 21:27-36; 22:22-26:32.

[8] https://biblehub.com/greek/3625.htm; see especially Luke 2:1 where “the whole oikoumenē” clearly refers to the Roman Empire.

[9] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 909.

[10] Josephus, Wars 2.14.6ff.

[11] Eusebius, Church History 3.5.3; Epiphanius, Panarion 29.7.8.

[12] Dan. 12:1 (LXX): kai estai kairos thlipseōs thlipsis hoia ou gegonen aph’ hou gegenētai ethnos epi tēs gēs heōs tou kairou ekeinou.
Matt. 24:21: estai gar tote thlipsis megalē hoia ou gegonen ap’ archēs kosmou heōs tou nun oud’ ou mē genētai.

[13] R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 915.

[14] Josephus, Wars 5.10.2-3, 12.3, 13.7; 6.3.3-4.

[15] W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, Matthew 19-28, 354; R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 917.

[16] John Lightfoot, Lightfoot’s Commentary on the Gospels, Matthew 24:27; Matthew Henry, Bible Commentary, Matthew 24:27, 28; Adam Clarke, Clarke’s Commentary, Matthew 24:27.

[17] Adam Clarke, Clarke’s Commentary, Matthew 24:27.

[18] W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, Matthew 19-28, 355-356.

[19] For the use of eagles (aetoi) as symbolic of the Roman military, see Josephus, Antiquities 17.6.2-3; Wars 1.33.2-4; 2.1.2; and especially Wars 3.6.2.

[20] Hindy Najman, “How Should We Contextualize Pseudepigrapha? Imitation and Emulation in 4 Ezra,” in Flores Florentino: Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Early Jewish Studies in Honour of Florentino García Martínez, eds. Anthony Hilhorst et al. (Leiden: Brill, 2007).

[21] Note that the same passage, Zech. 12:10, is applied in John 19:37 to Jesus’ crucifixion.

[22] Jeffrey A. Gibbs, Jerusalem and Parousia, 200; R. T. France, The Gospel of Matthew, 924-925.

[23] For further examples of the close relationship between creation and covenant language, see N. T. Wright, “Creation and Covenant,” in Paul: In Fresh Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005).

[24] For example, see Thomas Ice, “An Interpretation of Matthew 24-25 Part 34.”

[25] See the “furnace of fire” imagery in Ezek. 22:17-22 and Matt. 13:42, 50, as well as the literal fire that engulfed Jerusalem in AD 70 (Wars 6.5.1).

[26] Diabolos: John 6:70; 1 Tim. 3:11; 2 Tim. 3:3; Tit. 2:3; Apoc. 2:10; cf. Matt. 16:23; angelos: Matt. 3:1; 11:10; Mark 1:2; Luke 7:24, 27; 9:52; Phil. 2:25; 2 Cor. 8:23; Jas. 2:25; Apoc. 2:1, 18; 3:1, 7, 14.

[27] LXX Gen. 17:17, 8, 13, 19; 48:4; Exod. 12:14, 17; 27:21; 28:43; 29:28; 30:21; 31:16, 17; Lev. 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 16:29, 31, 34; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 31, 41; 24:3, 8, 9; 25:34; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10, 21; 25:13; 1 Chron. 16:17; Job 3:18; 10:22; 21:11; 41:4; Psa, 76:4; 78:66; 105:10; Isa, 24:5; 55:13; 60:15; Jer. 5:22; 18:16; 20:17; 23:40; 25:9, 12; 51:39; Ezek. 35:5; 35:9; Jon. 2:6; Mic. 2:9.

[28] Ilaria Ramelli and David Konstan, Terms for Eternity: Aiônios and Aïdios in Classical and Christian Texts (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013).

The Olivet Discourse (part 1 of 2)

    Jesus’ discourse recorded in Mark 13, Matthew 24-25, and Luke 21, commonly known as the Olivet Discourse, is very important for understanding New Testament eschatology. Apart from the book of Revelation itself, the Olivet Discourse is the longest prophecy in the New Testament. Despite the importance of this discourse, there is disagreement among commentators about whether this prophecy was fulfilled in the past, if it will be fulfilled in the future, or if a combination of these two views is correct. Since the Olivet Discourse has a direct and significant bearing on the overall eschatology in the New Testament, this is a fairly important issue. In this post, we will begin to look at the Olivet Discourse in context to try to determine the extent (if at all) of its past fulfillment.

    Pre-Olivet Parables

    Although the Olivet Discourse is often discussed on its own, this discourse is set in the larger context of a series of parables against the Pharisees, which may be important for understanding the discourse itself. Therefore, we will begin by examining these parables. The first two parables can be found in Matthew 21, and involve a proclamation of judgment upon the hypocritical Pharisee sect.

“What do you think? A man had two sons; he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ He answered, ‘I will not,’ but later he changed his mind and went. The father went to the second and said the same, and he answered, ‘I go, sir,’ but he did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?”

They said, “The first.”

Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him, and even after you saw it you did not change your minds and believe him.” (Matt. 21:28-32)

    This first parable is fairly straightforward. Jesus is pointing out that the Pharisees are hypocritical, because they claim to do God’s will and require others to follow their written and oral Law, but do not themselves do the will of God by following Jesus (cf. Matt. 23:3-5). Because of this, those who did follow Jesus — even the tax collectors and prostitutes — will enter the kingdom of God before the Pharisees.

“Listen to another parable. There was a landowner who planted a vineyard, put a fence around it, dug a winepress in it, and built a watchtower. Then he leased it to tenants and went away. When the harvest time had come, he sent his slaves to the tenants to collect his produce. But the tenants seized his slaves and beat one, killed another, and stoned another. Again he sent other slaves, more than the first, and they treated them in the same way. Then he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him and get his inheritance.’ So they seized him, threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him. Now when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”

They said to him, “He will put those wretches to a miserable death and lease the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the produce at the harvest time.”

Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the scriptures: ‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is amazing in our eyes’? Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that produces its fruits. The one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, and it will crush anyone on whom it falls.”

When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they realized that he was speaking about them. (Matt. 21:33-45)

    This parable adds more detail regarding the punishment of the Pharisees. They and their ancestors persecuted the prophets, and they now rejected (and murdered) the Son of God. Therefore, they would now be punished severely. Their punishment would involve the kingdom of God being taken away from them, as mentioned in the previous parable, but it would also involve their “miserable death.” Moreover, this punishment will fall upon the first-century Jewish aristocracy (high priests and Pharisees).

    The third parable adds another crucial detail, which allows us to identify this punishment in history:

Once more Jesus spoke to them in parables, saying: “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son. He sent his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding banquet, but they would not come. Again he sent other slaves, saying, ‘Tell those who have been invited: Look, I have prepared my dinner, my oxen and my fat calves have been slaughtered, and everything is ready; come to the wedding banquet.’ But they made light of it and went away, one to his farm, another to his business, while the rest seized his slaves, mistreated them, and killed them. The king was enraged. He sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city.

“Then he said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but those invited were not worthy. Go therefore into the main streets, and invite everyone you find to the wedding banquet.’ Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered all whom they found, both good and bad, so the wedding hall was filled with guests. But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing a wedding robe, and he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding robe?’ And he was speechless. Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ For many are called, but few are chosen.” (Matt. 22:1-14)

    According to this parable, the punishment on the first-century Jewish aristocracy would not only involve their “miserable death,” but the destruction and burning of their city (Jerusalem). This took place during the First Jewish-Roman War (AD 66-73), when in AD 70 the Roman Empire besieged and burned the city of Jerusalem; for an eyewitness description of this event, see Josephus’ account in Wars books 5 and 6. The parable goes on to state that, after the burning of “their city,” there would be a wedding banquet for the king’s son; this must refer to the ‘marriage’ of the Son to the true Israelite remnant (cf. John 3:28, 29; Rev. 19:6). This corresponds to the kingdom of God being “given to another” in the previous parable (Matt. 21:43).

    For the rest of Matt. 22, there is a digression into other topics, including the morality of taxation (vv. 15-22), the bodily resurrection (vv. 23-33), the greatest commandment (vv. 34-40), and the Lordship of the Messiah (vv. 41-46). As these do not have any direct bearing on our study, we will skip ahead to chapter 23, where Jesus again deals with the punishment of the Jewish aristocracy. After outlining the hypocrisy of the high priests and the Pharisees, he says:

“Thus you testify against yourselves that you are descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your ancestors. You snakes, you brood of vipers! How can you escape the sentence of Gehenna? For this reason I send you prophets, sages, and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town, so that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly I tell you, all this will come upon this generation.

“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is left to you, desolate. For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.’“ (Matt. 23:31-39)

    Like in the second and third parables, Jesus here blames the Pharisees for the deaths of the prophets at the hands of their ancestors (Matt. 21:34-36; 22:6). Because of this, he states that they will undergo “the sentence of Gehenna.” Although this is often translated as “the judgment of hell,” which implies that it refers to a postmortem punishment, the word used is geenna, which refers to the Valley of Hinnom. In the Old Testament, this valley was used for child sacrifice (2 Kgs. 23:10; 2 Chron. 28:3; 33:6; Jer. 7:31; 32:35). Later on, it became associated with the siege and destruction of Jerusalem, during which the dead bodies were buried in Gehenna (Jer. 7:32; 19:1-9). Therefore, “the sentence of Gehenna” in Matt. 23:33 likely refers to the same AD 70 siege and burning of Jerusalem which Jesus predicted in Matt. 22:7.

    This is supported by Matt. 23:36, in which Jesus states that “all this will come upon this generation.” Throughout the synoptic gospels, the phrase “this generation” (hē genea tautē) consistently refers to Jesus’ own contemporaries, especially the corrupt Jewish aristocracy (Matt. 12:41, 42, 45; Mark 8:12; Luke 7:31; 11:29-32, 50, 51; 17:25; Acts 2:40). Thus, by referring to “this generation,” Jesus is pronouncing that the aforementioned “sentence of Gehenna” would be a judgment on the corrupt first-century Jewish aristocracy. This appears to confirm that Jesus is describing the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem.

    At the very end of the chapter, Jesus switches from talking about a judgment on the Pharisees to a judgment on the city of Jerusalem, in which its “house” (the Temple) would be “left desolate.” This must refer to the AD 70 fall of Jerusalem, during which the Second Temple was also burned to the ground. As far as I am aware, there are no commentators that disagree with this interpretation. Therefore, this confirms that the judgment described in the previous verses, “the sentence of Gehenna,” also refers to the fall of Jerusalem.

    In summary, the parables which precede the Olivet Discourse all deal with the punishment of the first-century Jewish aristocracy (especially the Pharisees) because of their rejection and murder of the prophets and the Son of God. This punishment involved the destruction of both Jerusalem and the Temple, which took place in AD 70 (Matt. 22:7; 23:36-38). 

    The Disciples’ Question

    Now that we have finished studying the parables that precede the Olivet Discourse, we can begin to exegete the discourse itself. Immediately after Jesus pronounces a judgment upon Jerusalem and its “house” (Matt. 23:37-39), we read the following:

As Jesus came out of the temple and was going away, his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. Then he asked them, “You see all these things, do you not? Truly I tell you, not one stone will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down.” (Matt. 24:1, 2)

Compare this to the Markan and Lukan accounts:

As he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher, what large stones and what large buildings!” Then Jesus asked him, “Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down.” (Mark 13:1, 2)

When some were speaking about the temple, how it was adorned with beautiful stones and gifts dedicated to God, he said, “As for these things that you see, the days will come when not one stone will be left upon another; all will be thrown down.” (Luke 21:5, 6)

This account is obviously a prophecy of the destruction of the Second Temple complex, which occurred after the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70. As far as I am aware, there are no interpreters that disagree with this view, as Jesus is explicitly talking about the destruction of “these great buildings” which the disciples were pointing out to him.

    Later, the disciples come to Jesus privately to ask questions about what he has just said. However, their second question slightly differs between the three synoptic accounts:

When he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of your coming and the conclusion of the age?” (Matt. 24:3)

When he was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked him privately, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign that all these things are about to be accomplished?” (Mark 13:3, 4)

They asked him, “Teacher, when will these things be? And what will be the sign that these things are about to take place?” (Luke 21:7)

    The disciples first ask Jesus “when will this be?” (Gk: pote [oun] tauta estai) In the Markan and Lukan accounts, they then ask about the sign that will precede “these things” (Gk: tauta), i.e., the destruction of the Second Temple, whereas in the Matthean account, they ask about the sign that will precede “your coming and the conclusion of the age”. Because “the sign” (Gk: to sēmeion) is singular and articular in all three accounts, it must refer to the same sign. Thus, for the author of Matthew, the destruction of the Temple would take place at the same time as “your coming and the conclusion of the age” — perhaps even being the same event.

    But how can Jesus’ “coming” (Gk: parousia) have occurred in AD 70 at the destruction of the Temple, when he did not return to earth at that time? Although there will be a future visible, bodily return of Jesus from heaven (Acts 1:9-11; 3:21), at which the dead will be raised (1 Thess. 4:13-18), not every mention of a “coming” of Jesus must refer to his Second Coming (e.g., Rev. 2:5, 16; 3:3). The nature of the “coming” in the Olivet Discourse is elucidated in Matt. 24:30:

...at that time, all the tribes of the Land will mourn, and will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

The statement that “the Son of Man” would be “coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” is a quote from Daniel 7:13-14. This passage, however, does not describe the Messiah’s return to earth, but the Messiah coming to God in heaven to receive power and glory and a kingdom.

    Notably, at his trial, Jesus tells the Sanhedrin that “from now on, you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matt. 26:64). Since this is an event that would occur “from now on,” and because the members of this Sanhedrin died in the first century, Jesus cannot be speaking of his Second Coming. Instead, it must refer to his exaltation, when he sat at the right hand of God (Acts 2:32, 33; Heb. 1:3). Therefore, “seeing the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven” does not mean literally, visually observing Jesus on a cloud, but perceiving the fact of his exaltation.

    In addition, the ‘cloud-coming’ of Matt. 24:30 alludes to similar ‘cloud-comings’ in the Old Testament. When the Hebrew prophets spoke of Yahweh “coming on a cloud” or “riding a cloud,” this often described God’s judgment against a nation (Psa. 18:7-15; Isa. 19:1; Nah. 1:2-6; cf. Dan. 7:9-14). This aligns with the context of the Olivet Discourse, which deals with the judgment of the corrupt first-century Jewish aristocracy (Matt. 21:31, 41-45; 22:7; 23:30-39). Therefore, “the Son of Man coming on the clouds,” and the “coming” which the disciples asked about, deals with Jesus’ enthronement and the national judgment on corrupt Israel, not his bodily Second Coming.

    In fact, Jesus’ “coming” in the Olivet Discourse cannot refer to the Second Coming, because the disciples did not know about the Second Coming until after Jesus’ death and resurrection. They didn’t even believe that he would die, much less that he would ascend to heaven and leave them (Matt. 16:21, 22; Luke 24:18-27; John 16:16-18), so they certainly would not have known or asked about Jesus’ return to earth. Thus, when the disciples asked about “your coming” in Matt. 24:3, this must refer to the previously revealed coming of the Messiah to God in Dan. 7:13-14, not the Second Coming, which was first revealed in Acts 1:9-11.

    But what about “the conclusion of the age” (Gk: sunteleias tou aiōnos), which the disciples also asked about in Matt. 24:3? In the Septuagint (LXX), which is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible used by the New Testament authors, the Old Covenant and its statutes are repeatedly described as “eonian” or “age-during” (Gk: aiōnios). [1] Consequently, the New Testament authors viewed the period of the Old Covenant as an “age” (Gk: aiōn). This period was already “passing away” when the epistle to the Hebrews was written (Heb. 8:13), but finally reached its end when the physical Temple, the last vestige of the Old Covenant, was destroyed in AD 70 (cf. Heb. 9:1-14). The end of the Old Covenant in AD 70 had immense redemptive-historical significance, especially for the Jewish Christians of the first century.

    In summary, a comparison of the disciples’ questions in the Markan and Lukan accounts with their counterpart in the Matthean account shows that the destruction of the Second Temple, in AD 70, took place at the same time as Jesus’ “coming and the conclusion of the age” (Matt. 24:3; cf. Mark 13:3, 4; Luke 21:7). Although the Second Coming did not take place in AD 70, this doesn’t mean that Matthew made an error, because the “coming” in Matt. 24:3 refers to the ‘coming’ of the Messiah to God to receive power and judgment (Dan. 7:9-14; cf. Matt. 24:30), not Jesus’ bodily return to earth. As the disciples’ questions are clearly about the fall of Jerusalem, this suggests that the Olivet Discourse is likely about the events surrounding AD 70; otherwise, the disciples’ questions would be left unanswered.

    This Generation

    Later in the Olivet Discourse, Jesus provides some confirmation that the events which he prophesied took place in the first century, not in the distant future:

“From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, at the very gates. Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away.” (Matt. 24:32-35)

In this passage, Jesus states that “all these things” — the events predicted in the discourse — would take place before “this generation” (Gk: hē genea autē) passed away. Throughout the synoptic gospels, “this generation” always refers to Jesus’ contemporaries, especially the corrupt first-century Jewish aristocracy (Matt. 12:41, 42, 45; Mark 8:12; Luke 7:31; 11:29-32, 50, 51; 17:25; Acts 2:40). This strongly suggests that the events of the Olivet Discourse took place in the first century.

    Despite the consistent meaning of “this generation” throughout the synoptic gospels, other interpretations of “this generation” in Matt. 24:34 have been proposed by futurist commentators, who do not believe that the discourse was fulfilled in the first century. The most common futurist view is that “this generation” refers to the generation which “sees all these things.” However, this reduces Jesus’ statement to a meaningless tautology; of course the generation which “sees all these things” will not pass away until “all these things” take place. Moreover, if this were Jesus’ meaning, then it would be more accurate for him to speak of “that generation” (Gk: hē genea ekeinē) rather than using the near demonstrative “this generation” (Gk: hē genea autē).

    Others have suggested that “this generation” refers to the Jewish people, because genea can also mean “race.” However, it is very rare for genea to mean “race”; in fact, there is no other place in the New Testament where it carries this meaning. Moreover, Jesus has already said that “this people” (Gk: tō laō toutō) will be present during these events (Luke 21:23), so it would be pointless for him to repeat the same thing using a rare definition of genea. The same problem exists for those who claim that “this generation” refers to the ‘race’ of evil and corrupt individuals, as Jesus has already stated that there will be evil people during these events (Matt. 24:5, 9-12), although admittedly this meaning of genea is attested elsewhere in the New Testament (Phil. 2:15).

    Because all other interpretations of “this generation” in Matt. 24:34 suffer from serious deficiencies, the best interpretation is that this phrase refers to Jesus’ contemporaries, just as it does elsewhere in the synoptic gospels (without exception). This meaning seems to be confirmed by Matt. 23:36, in which Jesus states that “all these things will come upon this generation,” where the context confirms that “all these things” refers to the fall of Jerusalem and “this generation” refers to the first-century Jewish aristocracy (Matt. 23:30-39). Likewise, in Matt. 24:2-3, “all these things” refers to the destruction of the Temple.

    In summary, Matt. 24:34 confirms that the Olivet Discourse took place in the first century, as Jesus states that the events prophesied in the discourse would be seen by “this generation.” Elsewhere in the synoptic gospels, “this generation” refers to Jesus’ contemporaries, specifically the first-century Jewish aristocracy. Moreover, when Jesus makes a similar statement in Matt. 23:36, the context confirms that he is speaking of the fall of Jerusalem. Because Jesus did not finish saying “all these things” until Matt. 26:1, it is implied that the entire Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24-25) was fulfilled in the first century.

    In the next post, we will take a look at the specific prophecies in the Olivet Discourse to see whether they were fulfilled in the events surrounding the AD 70 fall of Jerusalem. If not, then something must have gone wrong in our exegesis of the passage thus far.

Part 2: https://thechristianuniversalist.blogspot.com/2023/08/the-olivet-discourse-part-2-of-2.html

______________________________

[1] LXX Exod. 12:14, 17; 27:21; 28:43; 29:28; 30:21; 31:16, 17; Lev. 6:18, 22; 7:34, 36; 10:9, 15; 16:29, 31, 34; 17:7; 23:14, 21, 31, 41; 24:3, 8, 9; 25:34; Num. 10:8; 15:15; 18:8, 11, 19, 23; 19:10, 21; 25:13.