Matthew 24:1-44

Dec 29, 2023

Matthew 24.1-44 English

Matthew 24.1-44 Greek

After posting the blog entry for Daniel 9:24-27, it became apparent (to me) that the destruction of Jerusalem was implicated at the end of Daniel’s seventieth week. So, I wanted to further investigate this idea, especially with regard to the viability of the Partial Preterist viewpoint (which may better reflect the meaning of this Matthew 24 passage compared with the futurist interpretation).

Please accept my apologies for the small font in the graphics. I have supplied two versions - one without the Greek, in order to facilitate a somwhat larger font.  At least either of these pdf files can be enlarged when viewed electronically.

If we skip the over-all synonymous parallelism of this passage that acts as a package of sorts for Jesus two replies, we can then focus on the chiastic structure formed by the disciples questions and Jesus’ reply.  In order to more readiy see the corresponding terms, I have color coded the three questions to match Jesus’ three answers that come in reverse order. Although we have three parallels, I still view this as an ABBA chiasm. This is because I think we can see how the latter half of the disciples questioning requires ellipsis to make it clear their are two questions. Thus, when they ask, “Tell us, when will this be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” We can supply the ellipsis (italics) such that the three questions are apparent: When will these things be? What will be the sign of your coming? What will be the sign of the end of the age? 

Our Lord is well organized in his approach to answering the disciples questions. He splits his first reply into two parts: false signs contrasted with the true prophetic sign of the end - that which was spoken by the Prophet Daniel. Please note that both parts of Jeus replies come similarly in chiastic form with a “dangling” chiastic structure conclusions. I ran out of alpha-numeric symbols. And so resorted to use of asterisks to mark time progressions, a long >< to show where the discourse marker “οὐν” (so, therefore) occurs. There are also dashes (-) used at vs 34-35 to show a probable parallel. While on the subject, the reader will have to distingish between an x marking the middle of a chiastic structure (e.g., vs 11, 25) and the same x  intended to match up with y & z at several points within the over-all structure (cf, 17-19, 31, 40-41). These latter observations tie in the location of the elect (men in the field or women at the house) with the angelic directional references.

Note that Jesus uses the phrase "end of the age" in Matt 13 with reference to the angelic reaping etc. So, it is understandable why full-preterists feel the need to be consistent. Yet, the chiastic outline of the Olivet Discourse may at least plausibly show how the Lord is supplying lots more information in context of Matthew 24 (than in Matthew 13) while not being as specific as we might wish with regard to distinguishing and timing these events. To explain the outline, just briefly, the Lord himself maintains a distinction in his three replies to the disciples three initial questions. He does so, in such a way, that the tribulation (~AD 70) is explained as if in a snapshot next to a snapshot of the coming of the Lord (along with the angelic actions as also depicted in Matthew 13). The two snapshots are seen together, like two mountain ranges in the distance (such that we do not at first distinguish the distance in time between the two events). We need not let "Immediately" in Matthew 24:29 force us into concluding the Lord came in AD 70. While normally this word means exactly what we first assume ("immediately"), it is also used in contexts with a degree of delay (e.g., 3Jn 14 where it means "very soon" or Mark 1:21 where "immediately" would have occurred on the very next sabbath). Louw & Nida’s lexicon mentions the word may refer "to the very next event relevant in the total context" (in this case, an eschatological context). Also, there are times in the Septuagint when this word is translated as "suddenly" (e.g. Job 5:3). This latter meaning might also fit with the context of Matthew 24. For the sake of Orthodoxy, it is important to consider this ambiguity in Mattew 24 as a feature and not a bug. Maintaining a partial Preterist viewpoint (as distinguished from a full Preterist view) is plausible way to harmonize the otherwise seemingly mixed eschatological message of the Olivet Discourse. 

The following harmony of the synoptic gospels may be helpful in that it provides a breakdown of sorts, showing the various parts of the discourse. Although we should be sure to understand Matthew on his own terms, Luke’s presentation is, at times, very instructive. The colored blocks represent the main sections of Jesus reply while the yellow block encompasses the entire structure.