“Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.” Was Luke writing with a pen dipped in irony? They called it Passover, but with their evil intentions it could be no true Feast of the Lord. The true Passover that weekend was the deeply religious rite—“this passover”-which Jesus kept with his disciples (Lk.22:15).

And unleavened bread was to be a pointed reminder to all Israel of the uncorrupt life before God to which the entire nation was called.

But now was the time, so Jesus ominously reminded the twelve (including Judas!) when “the Son of man is delivered up to be crucified” (Mt.26:2RV).

It was with such portentous words that Jesus again prepared the minds of his disciples for what lay ahead. His hour was come, and-fully instructed by the Holy Scriptures—he knew it well, but it is very doubtful whether they did, even though their Master had made persistent efforts (Studies 150,151) to prepare their minds for the faith-shattering events which must soon come to pass.

“The Son of man is being betrayed”, he said. Then, at that very time (so the next verse insists) the chief priests and scribes were meeting unofficially at the high priest’s palace, and not in their normal place of meeting, the Hall of Unhewn Stone. It was a hand-picked assembly. Wracking their evil brains, they conferred how they might remove this troublesome prophet of Galilee. Men like Nicodemus, Gamaliel, Joseph of Arimathea, had not been invited.

Not long before this, Joseph Caiaphas had roughly thrust his point of view at the Sanhedrin. “Ye know nothing at all,” he had said, offensively expressing his dislike of the Pharisee-dominated council which normally gave him little co-operation, “neither do ye consider that it is expedient that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not” (Jn. 11:49,50).

And now, at last, they had all come round to his point of view. The devastating arguments of Jesus and his withering censure of their hypocrisy had made converts of them all-to the ruthless policy of a scheming high-priest.

Recent events had frightened them. The tumultuous acclamation of Jesus by the Galilean pilgrims, his high-handed assumption of authority in the temple, his easy parrying of their dialectic as though they were so many brash undergraduates, and his blazing white-hot anger at their religious impostures, had made it painfully evident to the most cautious of them that Jerusalem, and indeed all Jewry, must soon make its choice between him and them. Vested interests were in peril. Jesus had hurt their most sensitive spot. So “they sought how they might take him by craft (s.w. Gen.3 :1 Dt.27:24 LXX; ls.53 :4) and put him to death”.

But how? Ah, there’s the rub! A review of past moves against this mild Galilean gave little cause for satisfaction or self-congratulation.

Past efforts against Jesus

There had been a campaign against his cool disregard of the tradition or the elders about Sabbath-observance; yet he had discredited them all and had ruthlessly exposed the utter hypocrisy of their position-and this before the multitudes. A dead loss! (Mk.2 :24 and 3 :2; Jn.5:16and9:16).

A different line of attack showed greater promise, and for a while they had plugged away with dogged pertinacity. ‘Miracles? Yes, of course he works miracles!’ Who would dream of doubting it? But, can’t you see, the explanation’s obvious-he casts out devils because he himself is possessed by the biggest devil of all; he casts out devils by the prince of the devils; isn’t it clear that the man is out of his mind? ‘(Mt.9 :34 and 10 :25 and 12 :24; Jn.7 :20 and 8 :48,52 and 10 :20). But the irresponsible lunatic had turned on them and exposed the flimsy illogicality on which their blasphemy rested, the crowd meanwhile laughing at their discomfiture and marvelling at the deft use of such quick rapier-like mental powers.

It was no good. To meet this man head-on was to invite further trouble. They must work behind his back. So they had begun a nasty whispering campaign about his origins. That would put the brake on the progress of his campaign, for what Jew would find room for a Messiah born of fornication? (Jn.8 :14,16,19,41,46,48; 9 :29). But in reply, this Jesus had dared to return the charge against them, the nation’s holy men. They, and not he, were the false children, disowned and cast out by the God of Abraham, whilst he could assert with confidence his origin not only from a pure and holy woman but also from God Almighty Himself! And, in proof, he challenged them to find one single sin in all his life (Jn.8:33-47).

What could they do against an adversary of such calibre and character? Their resort to physical force ended only in futility and puzzlement. For when they sent the temple guard to arrest him, these police returned empty-handed, inviting their own dismissal with their openly-expressed admiration of him (Jn.7 :45,46). And when they themselves, simulating holy indignation, had taken up stones to batter him to death, he had somehow vanished or hidden, and the chance was gone (Jn. 8:59 and 10 :31,39).

A renewed frontal attack by a guards brigade of Biblical experts had been sent reeling back. Even the cunning attempt to embroil him with the Romans over the ticklish question of tribute to Caesar had been quietly and easily parried, and they had finished up feeling foolish and quite unable to hide their mortification (Mt.22:46).

By this time it was patent to the Pharisee majority in the Sanhedrin and to every priest in the cabal of Annas that this Jesus must go. It was he or they! And if desperate measures were needful to save for them “their place and their nation,” then in the name of God let desperate measures be taken.

But again, what or how? Whatever was done must be done quietly, for the Romans were nervous about the excitability of the Passover crowd, and only a few days ago this most recent pilgrim invasion of Jerusalem had shown an exasperating enthusiasm for this unmessianic Messiah. So, at all costs, not on the feast day. One speaker after another insisted on this—not because it was a feast of the Lord, but for the sake of their own skins! Nor must the thing be done openly with the knowledge of the crowd (yet with what gladness were these evil men soon to leap at an opportunity to be rid of Jesus on the very day of Passover; glad also to use the mob at its worst to force their will concerning him upon a reluctant governor!)

Evil hopes revived

There seemed to be only one ray of hope left to them. They must try to wreck this movement from within. That did not seem to be an altogether hopeless proposition, for already the secret dossiers compiled about the helpers of Jesus had revealed signs of faltering loyalty (Study 94), especially in Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot-“Judas, the one of the twelve” (Mk.14 :10 RV). The expression might imply: the disciple of outstanding ability or of high social standing; or, by anticipation, the evil one amongst them.

Yes, that line of attack offered some promise. They must act quickly. Mark has a sinister conjunction of phrases “they sought how they might put him to death . .. Judas sought how he might betray him”! (14:1,11).

Judas and Satan

That very day a Satan (Lk.22:3), an emissary of these desperate unscrupulous rulers, was empowered to enter into negotiations with Judas right away. This agent found his task easier than he could have believed. On some plausible pretext “he entered in unto Judas” (so Gk: see Notes) perhaps at the home at Bethany. Perhaps, like some of the other Jews of Jerusalem who had gone out to Bethany (Jn.12 :9), he too feigned a consuming eagerness to see Lazarus.

There can be little doubt that the Satan passages in this part of the gospels (Lk. 22:3, 31; Jn.13:2, 27) should all be read with reference to the human enemies of Jesus. With this approach all four places make good sense. The usual “superhuman Satan” interpretation is quite unBiblical.

Weakening loyalty.

The timing of this encounter with Judas could hardly have been better. For a year now (Jn.6 :15,60-71) his convictions regarding Jesus had been becoming more and more unsettled, and in various ways the past week had added bitterness and disillusionment.

At the house in Bethany his virtuous (sic!) protest against the criminal waste of expensive ointment had earned for him blunt rebuke before the others, coupled with a pointed reminder about his Master’s impending burial. Then how could Jesus be the Messiah? A dead Messiah was of no use to anybody. And even Jesus had no right to make him a target of rebuke before the rest (Jn. 12:4-8).

Then, next day, there had come the wide-open opportunity presented by the tumultuous entry into Jerusalem, for all the world as though he were a king taking possession of his capital. Pilate can’t have slept much that night! And yet such a superb chance as this was frittered away in a quiet disapproving tour of the bazaars of Annas in the temple area, Judas meantime gnawing his tongue with vexation (Mk.11:7-11).

The next day in the temple court there had been that parable of the vineyard, so plain that a child could understand it. Here was Jesus representing himself as the Son of the Lord of the vineyard-but a Son to be despised, killed and cast out, whilst the rest were left in possession (Mk.12:6-8). His Master, it would seem, was obsessed with a sense of failure. Then what use all those fine qualities of his if this weakness was to cancel them all out?

The day after that, the faith of Judas had reeled under another blow, and once again it had come from the mouth of a Master he had loved and honoured with the consecration of his own not inconsiderable talent. “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” (Mk.12 :13-17). Did Jesus really mean that? If so, there was an end to all hopes of seeing a Son of David reign in Jerusalem on David’s throne. Here surely Jesus was now going back on his own earlier plainly-expressed Messianic claims. Judas, this company of woolly-minded disciples is no place for a man of shrewd balanced judgment like yourself. Isn’t it time to make a break before the crash of failure involves you along with all the rest?

There was the more need to act with decision because, as the vision of a royal throne in Jerusalem faded, Judas had quietly and systematically re-couped himself by surreptitious embezzlement of the funds entrusted to him (Jn.12 :6 RV). Already he had some of it invested in a useful piece of real estate in Jerusalem (Acts 1 :18). How long could he keep such transactions from the knowledge of his leader and from the prying eyes of his fellow-disciples?

So the contact with the emissary of Caiaphas and Annas came at just the right moment, and without loss of time Judas was closeted with the chief priests and the officers of the temple police. The former of these were, of course, the authors of the strategy to be employed, and the latter directed the tactics of the scheme, for they would need to plan every move down to the last detail.

A sordid bargain

“What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you?”, said Judas. This was an excellent opportunity to save himself from the inevitable ruin which must soon overtake the movement. By this act of betrayal he would simultaneously ingratiate himself with the authorities and at the same time usefully feather his own nest a little more. So “he went his way (s.w. Jn.6 :67), and communed” with them (what a fellowship!) how-not whether or why or when —he should betray him (Lk.22:2,4). And these desperate evil men rejoiced (Lk: they were glad) at a much earlier prospect of success than they could have thought possible.

Judas went away from the secret meeting, his purse heavier with thirty pieces of silver. The difficulty associated with this sum of money is often overlooked. It represented in terms of modern English currency (1983) about £1500. When it is considered that the chief priests controlled all the revenue of the temple-millions of pounds a year-this was a very small sum for an avaricious man to ask for supplying such crucial help in an acute problem. It was the price of a mere slave (Ex.21 :32).

Thoughtful readers of the gospels have often osked themselves why Joseph, that impressively full and detailed type of Christ, should have been sold for twenty, and not thirty, pieces of silver (Gen.37 :28 and cp. Lev.27 :4). Is this Scripture’s way of emphasizing that Joseph, although so much like Jesus was not a Jesus?

Regarding this cash payment there is a significant difference of detail between Matthew and Mark. The former passage means that Judas received the money there and then (so the RV; Matthew quotes verbatim the Septuagint version of Zechariah 11 :12, where the meaning is plain enough; see Study 219). Also in Matthew 27 :3 Judas had already received the money. But Mark says the money was promised to him. (Lk: covenanted; s.w. 22 :29).

The obvious explanation is that the thirty pieces of silver were a token payment to show good faith (!), whilst the real wages for the execution of such a nefarious job would be paid when all had gone through successfully. Let the reader put himself in imagination in the place of these men dealing with a traitor, and ask himself: Would I have followed any other course? So it may be confidently surmised that if all had gone according to plan, a second sum of money (ten times as much?) would likewise have changed hands.

Thereupon, “Judas promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude” (Lk.22 :6). This verse calls for re-translation. It must be either “he confessed (faith in their promises)”, or else-the normal meaning in the Septuagint version (Jn.18 :3; Lk.22 :52; Mt.26 :55)-“he thanked them.” Either way there is something tragically pathetic about this exchange of faith in Jesus for confidence in the power and wealth of a group of godless schemers. And the Greek phrasing seems to suggest that Judas was making a condition that Jesus be taken with as little snow of force as possible. It was a condition which they readily accepted, and then as readily went back on.

Thus Judas Iscariot, the man whose surname would sound in Jewish ears as meaning “the man of great preaching” sold his birthright and became instead (as the name might also mean) “the man of cutting off” or “the man of divorcement” (contrast Ps.55:13,14). That agreement with his Master’s enemies was his bill of divorcement.

Notes: Mt. 26:1-5, 14-16

3.	Consulted. Gk. middle voice here is eloquent: not for righteousness’ sake, but for their own selfish interests.
5.	Lest there be an uproar. Not, be it noted, because the occasion was a Feast of the Lord!
14.	Then. The context requires a careful link-up with v.6-13, inserted here to explain Judas’s sudden decision.
15.	Covenanted. RV: weighed; but not literally. This is “the use of an ancient form of speech after the practice had become obsolete,” employed here to make the link with Zech. 11:12 LXX more evident.

Lk. 22:1-6

2.	They feared the people. What a praiseworthy fear! and (v.5) what a righteous gladness!
3.	Entered into Judas. The Greek verb here is identical with that in Luke 19: 7, 45 and 22:10 and 24:3, 29 and many other similar places.
	Being of the number. Literally: out of, suggesting more pointedly the divergence between Judas and the rest.

It is a question on which the highest experts differ. Some are emphatic that the Last Supper was a true Passover meal. Others are just as confident that it was an ordinary supper, taken twenty-four hours before the Passover celebrations. One of these two must be correct.

The compromise suggested by some, that Jesus and the disciples ate the Passover twenty-four hours earlier than normal, simply will not do. The lambs must be slain at the temple (Dt.16 :5,6), and the blood poured out at the base of the altar by a priest-but no priest in Israel would be willing to do this except at the time recognized by the temple authorities, the afternoon of the 14th Nisan. It would have been an outrage against all Jewish sentiment to have asked for the slaying of the lamb before the proper time, or to have killed it privately elsewhere. So this desperate expedient of an explanation must be disallowed.

At first sight, there appears to be strong evidence in the gospels for both of the other points of view. Here is a summary: Evidence that the last Supper was a Passover meal:

(Here, for convenience, the words of Luke’s Gospel are used, but most of the points have parallels in Matthew and Mark):

A.	Luke 22 :7,8: “Then came the day of unleavened bread when the passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.” The most natural way of reading this is with reference to preparation, on the morning of the 14th,of a Passover meal to be eaten the same evening, the beginning of the 15th-the usual Passover pattern.
B.	v.13: “And they made ready the passover.”
C.	v.15: “With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer.”
D.	Mention of two cups by Luke (v.17,20) ‘ suggests the ritual Passover, which actually included four.

Evidence that the last Supper took place on thenight before Passover:

a.	John introduces his account with the words: “Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come . . .” (ch.13 ;1); and v.2 continues: “and supper being ready” (not “ended”, as in AV; the Greek participle, and also v.26, both prove AV to be in error here); see Study 184.
b.	John 13 :29: “For some of them thought . . . that Jesus had said unto him (Judas), Buy those things that we have need of against the feast: or that he should give something to the poor.” But immediately after the slaying of the lambs in the temple court, the Passover sabbath began (Lev. 2 3 :6,7); so if this was the Passover celebration, no shops would be open at that time. And the needs of the poor for the feast, would have been dealt with long before.
c.	Joseph of Arimathea “bought fine linen” for the interment of Jesus (Mk.15 :46). This goes along with (b), and is a useful corrective to the claim that the synoptic gospels are solid in their evidence that the Last Supper was a Passover. (See also paragraphs g and h on this).
d.	“For that sabbath (the day after the crucifixion) was an high day” (Jn.19 :31)can only mean that it was the Passover sabbath, in the early hours of which (about 8 p.m.?) the Passover meal was eaten.
e.	The chief priests “went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover” (J n . 1 8 :2 8) . This seems to be decisive enough, unless the suggestion (not too convincing) be accepted that the word “passover” here covers the ensuing celebration which seven days of unleavened bread involved.
f.	“And it (the day of crucifixion) was the preparation of the passover” (Jn.19 :14) ). The word “preparation” was normally used for Friday, as the day on which preparation was made for the sabbath. Edersheim (“Temple/’ p. 188) makes the point that the rabbinic writings never use the name “preparation” for the day preceding the Passover sabbath, but commonly use it as a synonym for Friday. This “preparation”, then, was the Friday preceding an ordinary sabbath which in this year coincided with the Passover sabbath.
g.	Mark 15 :42 and Matthew 27 :62 say the something.
h.	The citation of the foregoing details is hardly necessary, since if Jesus did actually partake of the Passover, then all the irreligious and blasphemous transactions associated with his arrest and interrogation, the convening of the Sanhedrin and his trial, the rousing of the mob and the release of Barabbas, the crucifixion itself and the subsequent deriding of Jesus—all of these took place on the Passover sabbath which should have been given over to holiness and special religious observance.
i.	A different kind of fact which will carry special weight with those who are impressed with the accuracy of Old Testament prophecy: If Jesus did not keep the Passover, then his death on the cross at the ninth hour coincided precisely with the time when the Passover lambs began to be slain in the temple court—”the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” And, further, his resurrection would then be at approximately the same time as the special offering in the temple of another identical lamb along with the wave-sheaf of first fruits barley on the morning after the Passover sabbath (Lev.23 :11,12), for all the world as though the Passover lamb had come to life again and was being re-consecrated to God!
j	For the first three hundred years after the apostles all the early Christian writers who comment on this question say that the Last Supper was not a Jewish Passover. Chrysostom (350-400) was the first to teach that it was. And until the 9th century the church uniformly used leavened bread at the Eucharist. The change to unleavened bread was a Roman Catholic institution.
k.	Jewish tradition preserved in the Talmud says that Jesus died on the 14th Nisan.
l.	If Jesus had actually eaten the Jewish Passover, would not this have provided a powerful argument for the Judaisers in the first century church that Christians should do the same?
m.	The walk of Jesus and the eleven to Gethsemane was an infringement of Exodus 12 :22. It may be argued, of course, that this commandment was regarded as being in abeyance at that time. But would not the Law of Moses be more mandatory upon Jesus than current tradition?
n.	In the gospel accounts of the Last Supper, there is no mention, not even the slightest hint, of the lamb which was the main feature of the Passover meal. Plummer, on the one hand, regards this as decisive. On the other, Jeremias, the chief modern advocate that the Last Supper was a Passover, dismisses this with the observation that “this silence is no longer surprising, when we reflect that Mark 14 :22-24 is a cultic formula, not purporting to give a description of the Last Supper, but recording the constituent elements of the celebrations of the primitive church.” A typical modernist way of evading an uncomfortable fact! And what about the other three records?
o.	It is very clear from John 13 :5 that the group betook themselves to the supper table without any foot-washing taking place first. Because of the high-festival character of the Passover it is very difficult to believe that the disciples would contemplate beginning their Passover meal without prior attention to this detail.

Resolving the “contradiction”

The enigma presented by this assembly of facts has met with several different “solutions”; e.g.

(i)	John, writing last of the four, is quietly trying to correct the chronology of the others. (But this won’t do because items c.g.h. belong to the Synoptics also. Mark, for example, appears not only to contradict John, but also to contradict himself; contrast 14:12ff with 14:26).
(ii)	Errors of fact are to be expected in tk« gospels. They were written many years after the events, memories had become blurred, and in any case the writers were men untrained in the accurate observation and recording of detail. For most readers of this study, who have not so learned Christ, such a solution is utterly unacceptable.
(iii)	One set of facts must be explicable in harmony with the other set. This should be possible. The rest of this study aims at showing that it is possible.

In brief, the case presented by the first set of passages is not as clear-cut as it seems at first, whereas the evidence of the second set is irrefutable: Jesus did not eat the Passover.

A re-examination of A, B, C, D is called for.

The Passover lambs were to be slain “between the two evenings” (Ex.12 :6mg), i.e. in the late afternoon (this is demonstrated by Matthew 14 :15,23—the previous passover!), and eaten, according to custom, soon after sunset. So when the western reader comes to the words: “Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. And he sent Peter and John saying, Go and prepare us the passover”, he naturally thinks of this instruction being given in the morning for the preparation of a passover meal which took place later the same evening.

This almost instinctive interpretation overlooks the fact that for the Jew the day of the 14th Nisan, when the lambs were slain in the late afternoon, actually began at sunset on the preceding day (“the evening and the morning were the first day”)

So when the disciples approached Jesus (Mt.26 :17) with the enquiry as to their Passover observance, it was probably on the evening before, in the very first hour of 14th Nisan. It is difficult to imagine that they would take no thought for the keeping of the feast until less than twelve hours before its actual celebration. Indeed, considering the elaborate nature of the preparations to be made, it is remarkable that they did not raise the matter with their Master several days before this. “

It should be understood, then, that it was in the early evening of the Thursday that the disciples went into the city to make arrangements for the keeping of the Passover by Jesus and the twelve some twenty-four hours later. But Jesus and the rest followed them to the house that same evening and there partook of an ordinary supper in the upper room where, in the normal course of things, the Passover would be eaten on the Friday night.

On this view the chronology of the last hours of Jesus works out thus:

The 14th Nisan

6	Peter and John go ahead to make arrangements for a Passover meal.
9	Jesus and the rest follow to the same – room. The last Supper, an ordinary meal, takes place.
12	Arrest in Gethsemane.
3	Illegal trial during the night.
6	Formal condemnation by Sanhedrin. Trial and condemnation by Pilate.
9	Crucifixion.
12
3	Death of Jesus. Slaying of the Passover lambs begins. His burial.
6
9	Passover meal eaten by the nation.

So far as one can tell there is no chronological detail in the gospels which goes against such a reading of the facts. But what of the other evidence?—the mention of two cups, and the words of Jesus: “With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer?” These call for separate detailed consideration in a later study (188).

Meantime it is worthwhile to consider why Passover language should be so closely associated with the gospel narrative of the Last Supper.

“Christ our passover is sacrificed for us,” wrote Paul (1 Cor.5 :7). At a very early time the believers appropriated to the sacrifice of Jesus the language of the Jewish Passover. When all the instances of this are assembled, they become quite impressive.

	a.	“The cup of blessing” (1 Cor. 10 :16) was the name given by the Jews to one of the four cups of wine at the Passover feast,
	b.	“Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat . . . Where is the guest chamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?” To the disciples these words meant one thing, but in the mind of Jesus they had a different connotation. For him it was to be the memorial feast of a greater deliverance than that from Egypt. And it is this sense, doubtless, that the author of the gospel meant when he wrote significantly: “Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed’—for in retrospect he could see that it not only behoved the Christ to suffer, but to suffer then. No other time was fitting.
	c.	“And when the hour was come” (Lk.22 :14) reads as though with reference to the Jewish Passover, but equally certainly was meant for the hour of the Lord’s tribulation and glory: “The hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify Thee.” A quite superb double entendre!
	d.	Compare also the intensely dramatic force of: “The feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover. And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him (the Lamb of God)” (Lk.22 :2). To the student who reads with his eyes open, the gospels abound in delicate touches of this kind—nuances which so easily lose their flavour when one attempts to explain them.
	e.	“This is my body’—compare the Mishna’s reference to the roasted lamb as “the body of the Passover.”
	f.	“He broke it and gave it to the disciples;” the action was very similar to a certain part of the Passover ritual. The Mishna also has the comment: “the poor have not whole cakes, but broken pieces.”
	g.	“Ye do show forth the Lord’s death till he come” (1 Cor.ll :26) is a clear allusion to Exodus 13 :8: “Thou shalt show thy son in that day . . . “, a part of the Passover ritual called Haggadah, the showing forth. The verbal connection is very marked.
	h.	The sop given to Judas probably came to be compared with the bitter herbs dipped in the sauce and shared by all participants at the Passover table.
	i.	It may be possible to go further and see in the searching of the hearts of the disciples counterpart to the searching of the house for leaven (Ex.12 :19).
	j.	“Whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup” (1 Cor.ll :27,28). The warning is a direct and more searching counterpart to the responsibility laid upon every Jew to be purified for the Passover (Jn.11:55).
	k.	Peter’s allusions in his First Epistle appropriate Passover language in a quite systematic fashion:
		i.	“Redeemed … with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (1:19).
		ii.	“Obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Christ” (v.2; Ex.12 :22).
		iii.	“Not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold” (v.18; with reference to Ex.12 :35).
		iv.	“Gird up the loins of your mind” (v.13) similarly looks back to Ex.12 :11

These four are not the only instances in this chapter.

The words of Jesus appear to be explicit: “With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you. . .”, until they are read again with a special emphasis on the word “this”. He was speaking about the New Passover which he was now about to institute, and not the Jewish passover which all the nation was making preparation for.

The words that follow completely establish the truth of this view: “For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”

What is it which will be fulfilled in the kingdom of God?—the Passover celebrating deliverance from Egypt by the hand of Moses, or the Passover celebrating deliverance from sin by the hand of Jesus?

What is it which Jesus will himself partake of, again, in the Kingdom?-the roasted lamb of the Passover, or the Bread and Wine symbolic of his own sacrifice? And, in any case, why should Jesus be consumed with eagerness to eat a Jewish Passover with the twelve?

To ask such questions is to answer them. Undoubtedly Jesus was speaking of his new and better Passover.

Note: The next Study, although chronologically displaced, deals with a problem closely related to what has just been discussed.

This parable and the other two in Matthew 25 that go with it form the logical conclusion to the Olivet Prophecy. That discourse was not intended simply to satisfy the curiosity of some of the apostles, or of more recent disciples, regarding dramatic events in the end of the age. Its main purpose was to impart admonition and exhortation to those specially involved in the events it described. Filling out the knowledge of watchers for the Lord’s return, it imparts greater reality to what is shadowy and unclear, and thus faith is strengthened.

With this aim, Jesus began: “Then (at that time) shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins . . .”. The parable was intended for the special benefit of the generation which sees the Lord’s coming in glory. Its interpretation and application necessarily relate to the call of those who live to see Christ’s return. Thus any equation of the slumbering virgins with those asleep in the grave is vetoed by the very first word.

Perhaps ten virgins are specified because, traditionally, ten is the minimum number for a synagogue. Here, appropriately, it suggests the community of the New Israel. These have “gone forth to meet the Bridegroom” as he comes in a happy company bringing his Bride to the home he has prepared for her. The Bride herself is not mentioned in the parable-for the simple reason that, in a different but related sense, the Ecclesia of Christ is represented by the ten virgins, the main point of the parable being division between wise and foolish. All parables are found to involve some element of unreality or discordance (because they are parables and not the thing itself). Here the fact is easy to perceive. There is then no special difficulty about the interpretation.

All ten believe and know that the Bridegroom will soon be returning. Their going to meet him proclaims that his happiness is theirs also. This is now their chief concern. But five of them are foolish. Outwardly they are indistinguishable from the others—like the tares among the wheat, and the house built on sand standing beside the house built on a rock foundation. But time will tell.

Although the foolish go with lighted lamps, they give no thought to the possibility that they may have mis-estimated the time of the Bridegroom’s coming. So they have with them no reserve supply of oil. The other five, guarding against the shameful possibility of a wedding procession without lights and of the consequent disappointment of the Bridegroom, are careful to carry flasks of oil with them.

It would be a mistake to make any inference from the five and five regarding the ratio of worthy to unworthy in the Day of Judgment. In the parable of the Sower the proportion of unworthy is three in four, in the Talents one in three, in the Pounds one in ten, in the Wedding Garment one in a great many.

The hour grows late; eager expectation and lively talk about the Bridegroom’s coming gradually give place to drowsiness, until at last all of them have abandoned the attempt to stay awake. Making themselves as comfortable as they can, they settle down to sleep. Thus the cry: “Behold the Bridegroom! Come ye forth to meet him,” takes all of them by surprise. In greater or less degree all are unprepared.

As already shown, the slumbering of the virgins cannot answer to the sleep of death. Is it possible to imagine some who have been raised from the dead making frantic efforts to equip themselves adequately to meet their Lord before actually going to his presence?

Rather, this sleep of the virgins implies that, with the best intentions in the world, even the most dedicated of Christ’s servants will be caught unawares by theevent itself (1 Th.5:6,10), No matter how a man may school himself by devoted service and spiritual exercises, his Lord’s coming will suddenly provoke in him a tremendous sense of personal shortcoming and inadequacy. This is bound to be the case with a/I, in spite of every good intention and high aspiration. Such is human nature. The experience of all the ten is that “lamps are going out” (RV). In earlier studies the point has been made, not infrequently, that often in some detail or other the parables lack verisimiltude. Here is a further example. It is difficult to believe that the lamps of all the foolish virgins would be simultaneously on the point of going out just at the time when the warning cry is heard. Yet, when the spiritual significance is considered, nothing could be more accurate. For all who should be ready to meet Christ when he comes, but are not, there is bound to come a moment of intense honest self-awareness (and panic!) as the stark realisation floods into the mind of neglected opportunity and personal unworthiness. Of course this will be true, in some degree, for all, wise and foolish alike; for no man will be in a position to face his Lord in that day preening himself because of his own fine spiritual qualities. But the essential difference between wise and foolish then will be this-that the former will have reserves to fall back on, and the others will not.

No oil!

The interpretation of this “oil in their vessels” (besides what has already burned in their lamps) is not easy. The lit lamp is what makes the virgin acceptable as a member of the wedding party. This suggests that the light of the lamp means personal godliness and spirituality. From one point of view, all suddenly recognize how ill-equipped they are in this respect-lamps going out. But those with a well-balanced faith, based on the patient acquisition of the Bible’s instruction in righteousness (Pr.6 :23), will quickly be able to adjust themselves to this dramatic call to meet their Lord.

On the other hand, nothing is more certain than the panicky reaction in some: “I am not ready to appear before him now, but give me only a little time and I very soon will be.” This, too, is human nature-unregenerate human nature, alas, for only those who believe in salvation by works and in their own ability to make themselves spiritually presentable, would adopt such an attitude. Only those imperfectly schooled in the wholesome principles of Holy Scripture would assume themselves capable of quickly achieving a saving self-reformation.

The foolish ones will instinctively seek the aid of those better equipped than themselves-a natural human reaction-only to find that when the moment of reckoning comes, “no man can by any means redeem his brother, or give to God a ransom for him” (Ps.49 :7; cp. 1 Pet.4 :18), for then “every man shall bear his own burden.”

At such a time the only alternative to vigorous self-help is a humble faith-full dependence on the grace of Christ. In the parable-and, alas, in what the parable represents-the foolish ones consider the former of these courses of greater use to them, and with the energetic frenzy of anxious minds they rush off to knock up the proprietor of the village store, and so make good their lack of oil.

It may well be asked: Why did not the wise virgins counsel differently: ‘No oil? Then come with us without it. The Bridegroom is a gracious understanding man. He will forgive you.’ The simple answer is: Foolish virgins do not see the Bridegroom in this light (cp. v.24).

Meantime, the bridal procession draws near, and joined by the five virgins with brightly burning lamps, all go on to the new home and its inaugural festivities, “and the door was shut.” “That door was shut,” wrote Burgon, “which received Aaron after his idolatry, which admitted David after his adultery, which not only did not repel Peter after his three-fold denial, but even delivered its keys to him” (by all means compare also Gen. 7:16).

In a wedding such as this parable describes, would not the Bridegroom have been told that other virgins were on their way? But not so here. It is another instance of the parable not being true to ordinary life.

By and by, then, the others come to the place of the marriage feast. (The worthy always receive attention before the unworthy, Mt.25 :24,41; 13 :48). Feeling that now they have not only got their lamps burning brightly but also have made themselves a trifle more fit for appearance, they knock, begging admission. But now, what use their pathetic lamps in a feast which is already a blaze of light? To claim a place there when they have insulted the Bridegroom with their unpreparedness and non-appearance is an added impertinence. The Bridegroom has no use for them. “Verily I say unto you, I know you not.” It is a mutual ignorance. The Good Shepherd knows his sheep, and is known by them (Jn.10 :14). “Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer . . . for that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord” (Pr.l :28,29).

Thus Jesus added fresh solemnity to his much-repeated warning: “Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.”

A call and optional response

If there is any kind of fundamental resemblance between this parable and the experiences of disciples witnessing the Lord’s coming, it surely requires that in the Last Day there be some attempt at spiritual refurbishing as counterpart to this last-minute effort to get guttering lamps re-equipped with oil. It may be taken for certain that many, when called by angelic messengers to meet the Lord will wish for more time and further opportunity to spruce themselves up for the day of reckoning. This is the almost automatic reaction of spiritual immaturity. Those who, perhaps unthinkingly, believe in justification by works, will ask for a little more time in which to make themselves spiritually presentable. Yet there is no more fundamental Bible teaching than the principle that human nature cannot upgrade itself.

On the other hand, those who respond immediately to the midnight cry will do so not out of any conviction that they are already fit to share the joy of blessing in the Marriage of the Lamb, but because they have learned the grace and compassion and forgiveness of Christ.

This parable seems to have as an integral part of its message the idea that when the Lord’s disciples receive the call to meet him, there will be no compulsion to obey the call forthwith. Of course, sooner or later it must be obeyed, for “we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.” But the implication behind the experience of the foolish virgins seems to be that some will seek deferment of this “conscription”, in the hope that an interval of time, be it ever so short, will provide opportunity for a personal re-dedication to the imitation of Christ, and-in consequence-a better prospect of acceptance by the Judge of all the earth.

In the parable preparedness to meet the Bridegroom meant sharing the wedding rejoicing with him. But the delayed preparation of the others ensured that they were shut out. It would seem likely, then, that similarly, when the parable becomes reality, the waiting disciples will (in general) decide their own destinies by the kind of response they give to the angelic call. In that moment of shock a man will be able to act only according to his own essential character.

This concept has not received the degree of careful consideration which it deserves. The number of Bible passages which speak of the call of the saints to judgment is really quite small, but most of them have this idea explicitly stated, or by implication.

1. Luke 17:28-33: “Just as it was in the days of Lot … even thus shall it be … Remember Lot’s wife. Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.” No compulsion, but only direction, was applied by the angels then. And, also, “as it was in the days of Noah …”. Then God said: “Come thou . . . into the ark” (Gen.7:l).
2. Luke 12 :36: “Be ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord . . . that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately.” What point is there in the inclusion of this final word unless there be some special blessing associated with prompt response to the call?
3. Luke 21 :36: “Watch ye therefore and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.” Is there here an implication that some disciples will not escape the evils of that time, and will not “stand” (in the sense of Malachi 3 :2)?
4. Matthew 24 :31. It is the elect who are gathered together by the angels “with a great sound of a trumpet.” When only one trumpet was used in the wilderness, it was to summon the princes of Israel, and not the entire congregation (Num.10 :4).
5. 1 Thessalonians 4:17: “And so shall we ever be with the Lord.” There is pointed omission in this passage of the judgment which must necessarily precede everlasting blessedness. Is this because those called away have already sorted themselves out by the response which they give?
6. Psalm 89 :15: “Blessed is the people that knows the trumpet sound: they shall walk, 0 lord, in the light of thy countenance.” the context suggests judgment and the kingdom: “Justice and judgment are the habitation of thy throne . . . the Holy One of Israel is our king.”
7. Exodus 3 :6: Moses, unworthy and rebellious (4 :14,24), was “afraid to look upon God.” But Moses, faithful and meek and an importunate intercessor for his people, insisted: “I beseech thee, shew me thy glory” (33:18).
8. Matthew 13 :41,49: “The angels sever the wicked from among the just.” At first sight this is a direct contradiction of the many Scriptures which declare Christ to be the Judge. The theme of this study effectively establishes harmony here. (For further details: “The Last Days,” chapter 12.)

In “Nazareth Revisited” (page 173a) R.R. has a speculation on similar lines, but without any Biblical exposition: “There may be an attempt on the part of the self-condemned during the interval between emergence from the grave and appearance at the judgment-seat, to make good their short-coming case. And while so engaged the actual summons to Christ’s presence may arrive to the others assembled (in the parable the sequence is different from this), and those may be accepted, and the others afterwards arrive to find the door of the kingdom closed against unavailing cries of ‘Lord, Lord, open to us’.

Notes: Mt.25:1-13

1.	lamps. Gk: torches. But the mention of oil settles that these must be the usual earthenware lamps.
5.	Slumbered and slept. The Gk. tenses imply: They nodded off, and then slept on.
6.	A cry. The equivalent in this parable of 24:31 and 1 Th. 4:16. By whom is this cry made?—by members of the wedding party going ahead. In the fulfilment, the angels.
9.	Lest there be not enough. The original text is far more emphatic than this AV reading. It has a triple negative.
10.	Went in, the qualifications being that one be “faithful and wise” (24:45).

In the two preceding studies, so many indications have been found suggesting a fulfilment of the whole of this prophecy in the last Jays that it may be worth while to review briefly Ike relevance of a number of the details which have commonly been assumed to have only an A.D.70 fulfilment.

One question which is not easy to resolve is the scope of the fulfilment to be looked for in the present era. There can be little doubt that in its primary reference the prophecy is about events in the Holy Land. Then to what extent is the interpreter justified in generalising any later application to world-wide conditions?

Clearly, this is right regarding such details as “the gospel of the kingdom preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations.” And the fact has to be faced that even though the efforts of those most blessed with Bible Truth are relatively meagre (and not just because of fewness of numbers and smallness of resources), the main aspects of the gospel are going out far and wide through the efforts of Bible Societies and other organizations, especially through the medium of broadcasting.

The modern media also seem to match the Lord’s warning: “When ye hear of wars and rumours (literally: reportings) of wars, see that ye be not troubled.” The efficiency of the newsmen today conspires with modern violence ond lawlessness to make such an exhortation as this, highly necessary everywhere.

Some have also fastened on the Lord’s prophecy of persecution (Mt.24:9,10) as ground for a frightening expectation that in the last days the Lord’s faithful remnant will be put to the test perhaps more ruthlessly than any preceding generation of disciples. Such a conclusion has become almost popular! How true is it?

So far as can be seen this interpretation rests on the two verses referred to and a very idiosyncratic interpretation of a couple of passages in Apocaiypse. is this an adequate foundation for a dogmatic conclusion?

Since the Olivet prophecy, in its primary fulfillment, clearly has specific reference to the Holy Land, isn’t it fairly likely that he same restriction will hold good for the more important application yet to come? And if, as plenty of Scriptures indicate (“The Time of the End” ch.2), there is to be a faithful remnant in Israel in the last days (and signs of their emergence are already traceable), then is it not likely that the persecution foretold will be directed specially against such?—and maybe by their Jewish brethren!

Christ’s word: “the beginning of travail” has special fitness. The rabbis had a phrase: “the birth-pangs of the Messiah,” to describe the troubled prelude to the Messianic kingdom.

“Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.” These words, difficult of application to the era when Roman might imposed Roman peace everywhere, are appropriate enough to the twentieth century, and specially to the Holy Land and the surrounding countries. The last forty years have seen wars enough in that area, and obviously there are more to come.

“Earthquakes, famines, and pestilences” have been known in every era, but never in any age has there been such a massive world-wide combination of these evils as in recent times. Yet it may be that the real fulfilment is yet to be looked for in and around Israel. The “time of trouble such as never was” is still to come (Am.8:8; Zech.l4:4; Is.2:21).

Of special importance here is the warning against a collapse of faith because of the difficulties of the times—many becoming offended, many false teachers leading disciples astray, the love of “the majority” growing cold. The New Israel is to endure much discouragment before it comes to rejoice in the vision of Heavenly Glory. It may be surmised that one trial of faith especially will do a great amount of damage in days to come—so many have been encouraged to hold strongly dogmatic convictions about the sequence of events in the last days (and have even been taught to regard such interpretations as an essential element of the True Faith!), that when events turn out very differently, as they well might, the collapse of faith could be both dramatic and tragic.

It has already been shown (in Study 174) that there is ample evidence in the text for believing that the “abomination of desolation” passage (24:15-22) about the siege of Jerusalem should be read with reference to events yet future. Those who have so ably and devotedly re-built the state of Israel will flee to the mountains, hoping to evade the horrors of invasion. Nevertheless many will suffer the worst horrors of war, and many will be led away captive (Dt.28 :68; ls.19 :18-22; Joel 3 :2ff,19). Will the fugitives in that evil time have to face the rigours of winter? Or may it be that then, as formerly, for the elect’s sake there will be an easing of the severities of the “great distress and wrath upon this people”? And for the elect’s sake will those days be shortened? The saints in Christ may yet have a mighty work to achieve in their “praying for the peace of Jerusalem.” Jerusalem is to be trodden down of the Gentiles once again until the times of the Gentiles (“a time, times, and an half”; Dan.12 :7) have had their literal fulfilment (Zech.U :2; Obad.12,13; Ez: 36 :2; 35 :5).

False teachers

Just as the first century was plagued with false Messiahs and false prophets (Acts 5 :36,37; 8 :10; 21 :38), so also, in a somewhat different sense, the same phenomenon is here in the days before the Lord’s return—one false Christ is modern science showing signs and wonders and leading men off into the wilderness; but also, the charismatic leader influencing more by personality, or by false claims to Holy Spirit power, than by the Word of God; the delusions of nationalist or political aspiration; the false teaching that Christ is here already, invisible yet powerful, and has been for a generation. Plenty of them I

“Behold, I have told you before,” warned Jesus. And Peter and Paul, seeing clearly the need for renewed admonition, repeated it to their converts (2 Pet.3 :17; 1 Th.5 :1,2).

The Lord became even more explicit. Any claim that his coming has already transpired, in some secret or remote place, is to be given no credence—nor any teaching that it will so happen: “Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert (of mount Sinai); go not forth: if they shall say, Behold, he is in the secret chambers (J.W. doctrine); believe it not.”

“As the lightning”

As a corrective to such twisted notions Jesus emphasized the true expectation with the most vigorous simile available: “For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.” Lightning is always vivid, impressive, startling. More than this, it is always readily recognizable for what it is. Its sudden flash, seen from an enormous distance, is anything but secret or obscure.

But why should the Lord describe it as flashing from east to west? In no country of the world is lightning known to have preference for any particular point of the compass. As might be expected, explanation is supplied by the Old Testament. Jesus was not alluding to commonplace natural lightning, but to the lightning of the Lord.

In the early part of his ministry Ezekiel saw the Chariot of the Cherubim—flashing with fire and lightning (1 :4,14)—leave the temple, cross to the mount of Olives on the east of the city, and so disappear heavenward (10 :19; 11 :22,23), When the new temple was revealed to him, he saw the Glory return to the mount of Olives, and so “by the way of the east” into the sanctuary (43 :2-4). “So shall also the coming of the Son of man be.”

This interpretation harmonizes excellently with the repeated declarations that when the Lord returns he comes “in the glory of his Father” (Mt.16 :27), “in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (24 :30).

Eagles and carcase

But what did the Lord mean by his strange mini-parable: “For wheresoever the carcase is, there will be the eagles (vultures) be gathered together”? The same words are to be found also in Luke 17 in a somewhat different context. A suggested explanation can only be given serious consideration if it fits the context in both places. Nearly every proposed interpretation falls down in the face of this test.

Thus, reference to Jerusalem and the Roman eagles in A.D.70 is clean out of context in bold places.

Another popular interpretation, that here is a figure of the saints being gathered to Christ at his coming must be discarded on the grounds of sheer unseemliness, for it requires that the brd of Glory be equated with a carcase and his saints with an assembly of voracious vultures,

Again, the carcase is Jerusalem, and the vultures are the invaders of the Land in the last days (Heb.l :8; Jer.4 :13). This is better, but still it does not easily fit the context in Matthew, and not at all in Luke.

There is a better alternative.

Jesus was warning against false prophets teaching error concerning his coming. He then continues: If you (my disciples) show yourselves to be spiritually a carcase (as in Rev.3 :1), you will certainly find yourselves the prey of these “vultures,” the false teachers.

So also in Luke 17:

“One shall be taken and the other left.” The question: “Where, Lord?” is commonly taken to mean: “Taken where?” in spite of the plain fact that the Greek text does not say “Whither?” (see notes). But the meaning could just as easily be: “Left where?” Grammatically this has more to recommend it. It is also intrinsically more likely, for is not “Taken where?” a needless question, its answer being, fairly obviously: “Taken to meet their Messiah, of course.” But, “What shall be the fate of those left behind?” is a natural enough question. And to this Jesus gave answer: ‘Those who are spiritually dead will be left to the godless influences where they feel more at home.’ (See “The Last Days,” chs.11, 12).

Notes: Mt.24:23-28

23.	Believe it not. Gk. aorist implies: Don’t give it credence for a moment.
24.	False prophets. Note Dt.13 :3.
25.	I have told you before, as God warned Abraham; Gen. 18 :17.
26.	He is in the secret chambers. Catholics make this claim, regarding “the very Body of Christ” kept in the aumbry in church. Mystics say that he comes to their secret chamber in moments of prayer and contemplation (s.w. Mt.6 :6). Neither of these has the remotest connection with the real Second Coming.
27.	As the lightning. Lightning and thunder are inseparable. So, as might be expected, the seven Thunders of Revelation 10,14 belong to the same time of the Lord’s manifestation in glory. Cp. also Ps.29 : “the voice of the Lord.”
	Shineth. This verb—phaino—always has reference to divine phanerosis; cp. v.30: “appear.”
	The Son of man occurs 8 times in Mt.24,25, to emphasize not his human weakness but his divine right as Messiah; Dan.7:13.
28.	Wheresoever the carcase is. In. Lk.17 :37 this is in answer to the disciples’ question: “Where, Lord?’—not “Whither?”, as the question is usually read. It is true that John uses pou in the sense of “Whither,” but Luke never.

The Lord’s solemn warnings—already given concerning the day of his coming, that his servants be prepared-were now reinforced with repeated earnest exhortations on the same theme.

In a vivid mini-parable he pictured an eastern burglar quietly and patiently working away at the cement holding the stones of a house in place. He can do this without detection because the house-holder is away from home, occupied with business or pleasure. After a while the stone is loose and can be pulled away; and then another, and another, so that now there is room for the lithe body of this nefarious rogue to worm his way through. The valuables of the house are now at mercy.

Later the owner returns to the sickening experience of finding money, jewels, treasured ornaments, fine clothes, all spirited away. As every minute reveals the greater extent of the depredations, he mutters angrily to himself: “Fool! you fool! were you not warned that house thieves have been active lately in this locality? Then why did you not stay at home and guard the house?”

Or even if he had been at home, would it have helped if whilst the thief was stealthily making his burglarious entry he had been in bed snoring his head off?

Like a thief

From this parable, and from one or two similar passages, the false inference has often been made that the Lord’s coming will be utterly unperceived by all the world, saints and pagans alike. This view not only ignores Christ’s very plain declarations to the contrary (e.g. Mt.24 :23-27,30), but it also misses the point of the parable-that it is to the unprepared, unwatchful disciple that his Lord comes as a thief. And in every other place in Scripture where this figure is used (Rev.3 :3; 16 :15; 1 Th.5 :2; Lk. 12 :39) the same basic idea dominates the context (“The Time of the End”, chapter 16). This also is the emphasis of Christ’s exhortation: “Therefore become ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh”.

Peter’s response to this warning was: “Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even unto all?” (Lk.12 :41). Since the Master’s parables were more often addressed to the multitude or to Pharisees, he doubted whether this latest example could have special reference to themselves as the Lord’s stewards.

The faithful steward

The Lord’s next parable did not answer Peter’s questions explicitly: “Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household?” Anyone bearing special responsibilities of administration and guidance in the Lord’s house needs both qualities. What use is the man who is faithful and yet foolish? What sort of an influence will he exercise who is capable, but with evident lack of dedication to his Master’s work? And that work is, first and last, “to give them their portion of meat in due season.” This is an imitation of the Fatherly care of God Himself: “The eyes of all wait upon thee; and thou givest them their meat in due season. Thou openest thine hand (cp. the finger of God; Lk.ll :20), and satisfiest the desire of every living thing” (Ps.145 :15,16). This faithful concern is excellently exemplified in Joseph’s care and provision for his own family (Gen.47:12 LXX).

The Lord pronounced a special blessing on those who are thus faithfully and discreetly occupied at the time of his return-and also a special destiny: “He will set him over all that he hath.” What this reward may mean, in practical terms, it is hardly within the powers of such servants to assess in this day of small things. Faith accepts that it will be a great blessedness, even though present imagination cannot conceive what it might be.

The unfaithful steward

The obverse side of the picture was now painted yet more vividly, its warning being the more needful: “But if that servant (the same servant?) say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the men-servants and maidservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken; the lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware.”

Here is a hint that Peter’s later warning concerning those who speak with doubt or indifference about the Lord’s return-“Where is the promise of his coming?” (2 Pet.3 :4)-are within the ecclesia, and not its critics from outside. Of course, no servant of Christ puts this into so many words, but not a few proclaim it by their attitude. Yet how little such individuals (who dare to treat uncertainty about the time of the Master’s return as equivalent to certainty that he will not return soon) realise that it is themselves who are largely responsible for the delay! “If that hope (of the Lord’s early return) is allowed to perish, it will soon be supplanted by the hope that he will nor come soon” (Plummer).

The scepticism regarding the Lord’s coming is to be manifest alongside another unhappy development-a rough dictarorial attitude towards “fellowservants” (Mt.). To equate this detail of the parable with papal authoritarianism or any other characteristic of the apostasy would be a grievous error, for Jesus was speaking entirely with reference to his own household, and not about those with false pretensions to be such.

However, the word “begin” implies that such a crude ungracious exercise of power will have no time to ripen in the last days, because the Master’s return will interrupt its progress. Perhaps it may be seen as a unique sign of the times that today tendencies of this kind are unexpectedly perceptible in some quarters.

The parable also hints at a trend of another sort: “Eating and drinking with the drunken” (Mt.) suggests the formation of cliques obsessed with and intoxicated by certain shibboleths. The Lord’s faithful remnant have eagerly strained their spiritual sight, peering into outer darkness for signs that he is near, when one of the best signs is within their own community.

Comparable warnings

The first century had a splendid exemplification of these attitudes: “Diotrephes, who loveth to have the pre-eminence, receiveth us not. Wherefore, if I come (cp. Lk. 12 :46), I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and them that would, he forbiddeth, and casteth them out of the church” (3Jn 9-10).

It is possible that, when Paul wrote words of good counsel to Titus regarding the qualities to be looked for in an ecclesial leader, both positively and negatively, he had in mind the stewards, both faithful and unworthy, described in the Lord’s parable: “A bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self-willed, not angry, not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but given to hospitality” (Tit.1:7,8). Paul seems to have come as near as possible to taking the parable literally!

The self-willed steward of the parable and the details of his fate were apparently created by Jesus out of the warning given by Moses to Israel: “Lest there should be among you a man . . . whose heart turneth away this day from the Lord his God … and it come to pass . . . that he bless himself in his heart, saying, I shall have peace (“My lord delayeth his coming”; cp. lTh.5 :3), though I walk in the imagination of mine heart, to add drunkenness to thirst (i.e. to lust after evil, and to indulge that desire with impunity). The Lord will not spare him, but then k anger of the Lord and his jealousy shall smoke against that man . . . And the Lord shall separate him unto evil out of all the tribes of Israel” (Dt.29:18-21).

In the parable the fate of the evil servant is similarly described: “He shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites” (Mt.). The verb used here means, literally: “cut Mm in two (Gk: dichotomize!).” It has usually been taken figuratively as a close equivalent to “separate him unto evil.” But it may be that there is a fairly literal intention behind it, for such a pseudo-servant of Christ is really a double personality, a spiritual schizophrenic. Openly, he is dedicated to the service of his Master, but in actuality he seeks the honour and pleasure of a different master-Self. Appropriately, then, in the day of reckoning he is “appointed his portion (Jer.13 :25 LXX) with the hypocrites”, because hypocrite means play-actor, a man who pretends in public to be a character altogether different from what he really is—also with hypocrites because he intended to act the part of a faithful steward in the presence of his returned Master. In Luke (12 :46) the word corresponding to “hypocrites” is “the unfaithful”, to point a contrast with the “faithful and wise steward” whom the Lord appreciates and honours.

Yet another possibility about this “cutting in two” is an allusion to the idea of a covenant. When a covenant was made, why did the contracting parties pass between the pieces of the covenant sacrifice? (Hence the Hebrew expression “to cut a covenant”). Surely the implicit idea was: ‘If I fail to honour this agreement, then may I be cut in two as was this solemn sacrifice!

“Few and many stripes”

Jesus went on to enunciate a principle of graded retribution according to varying degrees of knowledge and responsibility. “And that servant which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not (his fellow-servants), nor (himself) did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.” There is fairness in this even by human standards. A fairly considerable catalogue of Scriptures (see Notes) emphasizes it as a divine principle also, right from the giving of the Law.

Let it be noted that the servant who knows not his Lord’s will is none-the-less reckoned blameworthy, for he could have known it, had he been possessed with any sort of eagerness for it. The very fact that he continues in ignorance argues a lack of concern for the will and honour of his Master. But regarding the one who already knows well what his Lord’s mind is, there is palpably far less excuse. “To whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more (in return)”-and so also the heavenly Master.

Watchfulness and duty

But however well or incompletely men are equipped for the service of Christ, in one respect they are all the same-all know that their absent Master purposes to return one day and judge the quality of their service in his absence. “For it (the time of return) is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch” (Mk.). The last phrase here clearly implies a special responsibility on the shoulders of anyone who is a leader«in an ecclesia.

Never must there be any relaxation of the spirit of wakeful alertness for the Lord’s return, because that awe-ful occasion may happen at any time. No man can ever be in a position to assert with sureness that “the time is not yet.” In what light do the blithe and ingenious computers of prophetic dates appear alongside their Master’s emphatic word: “Ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at cockcrowing, or in the morning” (Mk.). Was Jesus speaking literally about the time of day, or figuratively about the season of the year, or about a time in one’s life, or about an epoch in history? Whichever it is (and he may have been deliberately ambiguous), there is no mistaking the solemn emphasis of his warning: “Watch ye therefore.. lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. And what I say unto you, I say unto all, Watch.” And there, Peter, you have plain answer to your question: “Unto us, or unto all?” It is to you specially who have the responsibility of leadership, but in almost equal degree it is to all the rest also. Their Lord’s exhortation must surely have brought to the apostles’ minds the familiar temple practice of setting a night watch at no less than twenty-one specific points, and in addition a regular tour of inspection by others to ensure that all the watchmen stayed awake.

The unready

In Luke’s gospel this earnest warning to all is drawn out in a most graphic fashion. There is need for watchfulness not only regarding the signs of his coming but also the signs of one’s own spiritual condition: “Take heed to yourselves (contrast Mt.24 :45), lest at any time your hearts be overcharged (weighed down) with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life.” The first of these reprobated vices describes “the morning after the night before,” the nausea of it. The second is present dissipation. The third is worry about the future (Lk.12 :22). Thus, the evils of life yesterday, today, and tomorrow are wrapped up in one parcel and together pronounced illicit for the faithful and expectant disciple, because preoccupation with any of these things necessarily makes a man unready for his Lord’s coming. To all such, that day inevitably comes “unawares”-“for as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.” This last phrase is very close to Jer.25 :29 LXX; and note also v.27: “Drink ye, and be drunken, and spue, and fall, and rise no more.”

Was Jesus laying the vigorous figure of Ecclesiastes under contribution: “For as the birds that are caught in the snare, so are the sons of men snared in an evil time, when it (the evil time) falleth suddenly upon them” (9 :12)? Or was he directing his disciples to give special heed to the apocalyptic prophecy in Isaiah: “Fear, and the pit, and the snare, are upon thee, O inhabitant of the earth” (24 :17). This latter is the more probable reference. Its context (in LXX) has also “surfeiting, drunkenness, perplexity, worthy to escape.” (See “The Time of the End”, chapter 20).

“Watch ye therefore, and pray always in order that ye may be accounted worthy to escape (flee from) all these things that shall come to pass (distress of nations with perplexity, men’s hearts failing them for fear; v.25,26).” The comprehensive character of this crisis is emphasized by a repetition which is obscured in translation:

“all them on

all the earth…

all the time pray… to escape

all these things.”

Escape

A plain implication, also, is that escape from these dire troubles will be possible—not through any human contrivance but by the purposeful providence of God. A means of escape and safety was provided for Noah and his family, and for Lot (note how these come together in Lk.17 :26-29), for Rahab also (Josh.6 :17,22), and for the faithful observers of the Passover in Hezekiah’s time (Is. 31 :5); and for the early believers in Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (Lk.21:10,21). Clearly this is God’s method. And deliverance, by some means not specified, is promised also for His faithful remnant in the Last Days: “Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity . . .” (ls.26 :20,21; cp. ch.4 and 25 :4).

Rather remarkably, Jesus quoted this passage on an earlier occasion: “But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy chamber, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret” (Mt.6 :6). And now, in Luke 21, Jesus insisted that “escape” depends on prayer and watchfulness. So it would seem that, for God’s true servants, the place of safety is the place of prayer.

These who are watchful will be not only “worthy to escape” but also “worthy to stand before the Son of man,” as he was counted worthy to stand before the Ancient of Days (Dan.7 :13). The verb is actually passive in form, and implies: “worthy to be stood (by the angels who gather the elect; Mt.24 :31) before the Son of man.” Here is a further indication of safety through removal to the Lord’s presence at the time of his manifestation.

This use of the word “stand” becomes the more impressive, when it is considered that both Ezekiel (1 :28; 3 :23) and Daniel (8 :17) fell upon their faces in the Divine Presence, and had to be lifted up before Him. “Who may abide the day of his coming? And who shall stand when he appeareth?” (Mal.3 :2; Ps.130:3; l:3; Eph.6:13).

It is an awe-inspiring climax to a breath-lolling prophecy. The essence of it is watchfulness. Combining the three gospels, it may be seen that no less than six times in the course of his peroration Jesus bade his disciples watch (Mt.24:42, 44; Mk.13:35, 37_; Lk. 21:36; Mt. 25:13 – noneof these coincide): The repetition expresses his intense concern because of foreknowledge of evil times and their debilitating effect on the faith of his servants. Strange that the Lord gave no indication that his sombre warnings are really for a generation coming 2000 years later, and not for those who heard them spoken! See “Revelation” (by H.A.W), p. 259ff.

In this present time, of which Jesus spoke so portentously, watchfulness brings its own immediate reward: “When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh.” Jesus was alluding to Psalm 24 :7,9. Note the similarities:

	Luke 21		Psalm 24
25.	The sea and the waves roaring.	2.	The sea and the floods.
36.	Stand before the Son of man.	3.	Stand in his holy place.
28.	Lift up your heads	7, 9.	Lift up your heads,
Mk.13:34	Commanded the porter to watch.		O ye gates (i.e. gate keepers).
28.	Your redemption draweth nigh.	5.	Righteousness from the God of his salvation.
Mt.24 :31	He shall send his angels to gather his elect.	10.	The Lord of hosts.

As the days become more corrupt and violent and frightening, the faithful, bowed down with the burden of an ungodly world (Lk. 13:11 uses the same word about the bent woman in the synagogue), are uplifted in spirit at the imminent prospect of seeing Christ in glory. With outstretched neck (Rom. 8 :19) they look away from all these evils to the coming of the King.

Notes: Mt.24:42-51

47.	Clearly, all rewards will not be the same. Contrast the reward in Lk. 12 :37.
50.	Day… hour. These words look back to v.42RV, 44. See also 25 :13.
	When he looketh not. The idea is: When he is confident that he will not come.
51.	Cut him asunder; s.w. Rom.16 :17; 1 Cor.3 :3. In this way he smote his fellow-servants!
	A portion with the hypocrites. This seems to imply that before the ultimate fate of the rejected there will be first a living exposure of the unworthiness of these unfaithful ones. Cp: “a sinner a hundred years old shall be accursed” (ls.65:20). What a contrast with v.47!
	Gnashing of teeth. Ps.112 :10, and Studies 154,163.

Lk. 12:35-48

	Problem: Why should Luke insert this paragraph here?
42.	Household A remarkable double-meaning word: (a) an act seeking the special favour of God (as in Jl. 2:15; 1:14 LXX); (b) healing the sick! (English: therapy).
47, 48	Lev.4 :3,13,22,27; 27 :8; Num.11 :1 (contrast before the Law was given: Ex.14 :11-14; 15 :24,25; 16 :2-8; 17 17:3-7; Heb.10:26-29) 2Sam.6:7(cf. 1 Sam.6:7-8); Jas.3:lRV; Mt,10:15.

Lk. 21:34-36

35.	Upon all the face of the earth must surely be read with reference to the Land. Else why did Luke not use oikoumene ? The allusions to Is.24 seem to have an “Israel” context. The word for “dwell” supports this; cp. also Jl.2:32.
	Watch. Here, and in Mk.13 :33, our Lord used the much less common word which means “chase sleep away” (Heb.13 :17; Eph.6:18). In other places in this Olivet exhortation “watch” is equivalent to O.T. paqad, act as overseer
	Always RV; at every season. The word here may refer to one of the feasts of the Lord (LXX usage). If so, here is a pointer that the Lord will come at Passover or Pentecost or Day of Atonement or Tabernacles. The first?

Jesus brought his long Olivet prophecy to an appropriate conclusion with what is certainly the most detailed picture of the Last Judgment to be found in the Bible. He introduced it with a striking allusion to a vigorous Old Testament prophecy of the Last Days: “When the Son of man shall come in his glory (24 :30), and all the (holy) angels with him …” This is very much like Zechariah 14 :5. Some manuscripts have actually assimilated the word “holy” from Zechariah (“saints, holy ones”).

“Then shall he sit on the throne of his glory: and before him shall be gathered all nations.” This last phrase has been the subject of much misunderstanding. Not infrequently the conclusion has been drawn from this that the ensuing picture is not a judgment of those in Christ, but a tribunal at which the nations of the world are judged on their past treatment of “these my brethren” (often taken to mean the Jews). There are so many difficulties in the way of this interpretation, and so many arguments in support of the obvious alternative—that this is The Judgment at which Christ will call his own servants to account—that no room is left for the idea of a judgment of nations. The pros and cons are worth tabulating.

1. Where else does the Bible speak of nations being judged in the Last Day? Is there a single verse? It looks as though this doctrine is left supported by this solitary text. Does the point need to be emphasized that any teaching based on only one text is probably not taught even by that? An idea which appears to be propounded in one place only in the volumes of Holy Scripture is best left alone. It is almost certainly mistaken. (There are, of course, lots of prophecies about nations being judged in the sense of “punished,” but that is a very different matter.)
2. Judgment on a national footing is humanly incomprehensible. Not a few nations of the world have had practically no contact at all with Jews. How do they come into this? And how can judgment be meted out fairly to nations in the lump, since all kinds of disposition towards Jews (or saints), from one extreme to the other, have been known in the same generation of the same people; e.g. England has known Fascist anti-Semites and Christadelphians in about equal numbers! Then is England to be blessed or cursed for its attitude to the Jews? Or is the decisive factor to be national policy? In that case a nation may find itself wonderfully blessed (or cursed) because of decisions taken round a table by a handful of politicians for the usual political motives and not at all for humanitarian or spiritual reasons. Very strange!
3. The basis of acceptance in this judgment is the kind of life only possible in individuals -food and drink to the needy, helping the sick, giving hospitality, visiting those in prison.
4. The rejection intimated here (v.41-45) has no element of anti-Jewish feeling behind it (or anti-anything). The reason given is sheer neglect of simple duty to others.
5. “Then shall the King say to them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (v.34). Is it possible to apply such language to any unregenerate nation in the world? It belongs only to those chosen in Christ before the world began (Eph.l :4). This consideration, by itself, would appear to settle the question. But there are plenty more reasons.
6. “When saw we thee hungry, thirsty, sick, in prison, and did not minister unto thee?” These are the words of people conscious of having lived lives of “Christian service.” Godless, or even godly, nations of the world could hardly speak of themselves in this fashion.
7. “These my brethren” requires that those alluded to be actually present. The most obvious reference is to those already approved and set at the Lord’s right hand. And gospel usage is emphatic that “his brethren” (Jn.l :11; 7:3), and “my brethren” are his disciples (Mt.l2:49,50; 28 :10;Jn.20:17).
8. All the associated parables-the faithful and unfaithful stewards, the wise and foolish virgins, the talents—have a strong emphasis on personal responsibility to Christ. Is it possible that Jesus switched suddenly to a very different theme? Is it not much more likely that this Last Judgment is an extension of the parables just mentioned?
9. The Greek text of verse 32 pointedly indicates emphasis on individuals rather than nations. (Details in “The Time of the End,” chapter 17). The grammatical technicalities, hardly suitable for inclusion here, are obvious enough to any reader of the Greek New Testament.
10. This parable of sheep and goats is very clearly borrowed from Ez.34 :17,20, a prophecy which is about unworthy treatment of Israelites by Israelites. It is easy to see how Jesus has adapted this for a similar picture of attitudes in the New Israel of God. But it is not at all easy to see why it should suddenly refer to the treatment of Jews by Gentiles.
11. The expression: “all nations” (or “all the Gentiles”-same phrase) is not infrequently used in the Bible for “those who are called out of all nations.” A specially good example is ls.25 :7: “And he will destroy in this mountain (mount Zion, where Christ sits on the throne of his glory) the face of the covering that is cast over all people,, and the vail that is spread over all nations.” The next verse shows very clearly that saints out of all nations are meant, for it is for them that the Lord “will swallow up death in victory.” In 1 Corinthians 15 :54 there is Paul’s authority for this interpretation. Other examples: Gal.3 :8; Rom.4 :17,18; 15 :11; Acts 15 :17; Ps.9 :17 (Heb.) and especially Mt.28 :19, where the phrasing in the Greek text follows exactly the same pattern as in 25 :32.

With such reasons in its favour, the reference of this concluding section of the Olivet prophecy to the day when Christ judges his saints appears to be well founded.

A Gospel of Judgment

Teaching concerning Judgment is much more strongly emphasized in Matthew’s gospel than in any of the others. There is the separation of wheat from chaff, and of the sincere from the hypocrites, of wise and foolish builders, wheat and tares, good fish and bad, profitable and unprofitable servants (3:12; 6:2,5,16; 7 :24-27; 13 :30,48,49; 25:14-30), and now sheep and goats. There are also parables of this character—the unmerciful servant, the labourers, in the vineyard, the wicked husbandmen, the wedding garment, the faithful and unfaithful servants, and the wise and foolish virgins (18:23-34; 20:1-16; 21:33-41; 22:1-14; 24:45-51; 25:1-13).

When the judgment takes place, Christ sits “on the throne of his glory.” This looks back to Ezekiel’s description of the glorious throne of God (1 :26-28). Christ’s coming is “in the glory of his Father”(Mt.l6:27).

This throne of glory will be, unquestionably, in Jerusalem (Lk.l :32). In the parable of the pounds, it is when the nobleman has “received the kingdom” that he calls together his servants so that they may give account of their service. And since a large number of Scriptures indicate that the saints will receive their blessing of immortality in Jerusalem (see Notes), there is good reason for believing that they will be judged there.

The process of judgment

The figure of a shepherd separating sheep and goats tells all that it is necessary to know about the actual process of judgment. A good shepherd can distinguish sheep from goats at a glance. No need for prolonged scrutiny. The shepherd knows at once and without any possibility of a mistake which is a sheep and which is a goat. Indeed, as the passage under consideration goes on to suggest, both sheep and goats are readily recognizable by their voices! In the face of these considerations all the surmises about a Judgment lasting 40 (or 75) years are shown to be mere guesses.

Those on the right hand are greeted as “ye blessed of my Father,” because now they experience the supreme blessing of knowing sin put away for ever. This specialised meaning of the word “bless” is not uncommon in the Bible. In this way it is specially associated with God’s promises to Abraham (Gen.22:18; Acts 3:25,26; Gal.3:8,9).

The invitation to “inherit the kingdom” contrasts splendidly with the rich young ruler who thought to “inherit eternal life” through the keeping of commandments. These inherit because they are “children of God . . . heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ” (Rom.8 :16,17); “suffering with him, they are glorified together with him.”

Acts of kindness?

The simply phrased but telling examples of Christian piety in action can easily be read mistakenly as a declaration that humanitarianism is the highest virtue and that this in itself qualifies for everlasting blessedness. “An eternal kingdom in return for such insignificant acts of kindness!” is the comment of one misguided writer. Such a point of view exalts the second commandment above the first. It can only be sustained by setting aside the massive teaching of both Old and New testaments regarding justification by faith. The examples given here are necessarily practical because it is practical expressions of faith such as these which are capable of being appreciated by those who are rejected. That there is here no justification by works is readily seen from the fact that these who are praised for their acts of sympathy and unselfishness are apparently unaware of having done anything of any consequence: “When saw we thee. . .?” -a remarkable contrast with the contributor to Parity who signs himself: “Inasmuch.”

Christ and his brethren

In many a place the gospels emphasize the way in which the suffering or difficulties of others moved the deep compassion of Jesus, but amongst them all is there any more telling than this? When any humble disciple suffers from longer or thirst or nakedness or hardship, Jesus himself hungers and is thirsty and shares the pangs of suffering. When the disciple is sick, so also is Jesus. When persecution and imprisonment fall on the faithful, Jesus also is afflicted and behind bars.

Scripture has many examples of this identification which is true fellowship. “God had mercy on him,” wrote Paul about Epaphroditus, “and on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon arrow.” When Samson prayed: “Let me die with the Philistines” (Jud.16 :30), he was at last perfectly identifying himself with the cause of his oppressed people, and not at all with the Philistine foes. “Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord” sums up the highest happiness of the faithful servant (Mt.25 :23).

There are also examples in plenty of the spirit which proudly holds itself aloof. “I thank thee, Lord, that I am not as other men.” The same self-righteous Pharisees (Lk.18 :11) “sit in Moses’ seat. . . they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers” (Mt.23 :2-4).

But Jesus, the Lord of glory, not only shares the burden and yoke of his humble followers (Mt. 11:28-30), but also in the day of his kingdom he delights to acknowledge them as his brethren: “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” “For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one (one Father? or one nature?): for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren” (Heb.2 :11). “Go tell my brethren,” he said, “I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God” (Jn.20 :17). And in the “great congregation” at the Last Judgment “I will declare thy name unto my brethren” (Ps.22 :22).

It is specially noteworthy that in these words of approbation at the Judgment, the Lord will not say: “Ye did it to me also.” But absolutely: “Ye did it unto me.” And especially when “the least of these my brethren” are seen to be not socially but spiritually the least, faith becomes the motive power in such a manifestation of true Christian spirit. Accordingly, good fellowship with humble unattractive fellow-disciples is called faith by the apostle James: “My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the lord of glory with respect of persons …”(2:1).

The contrasting picture of the rejected is all the more stark because of point for point correspondence with the blessed:

Then shall the King say unto them	Then shall he say also to them
on his right hand …	on the left hand…
Come, ye blessed of my Father,	Depart from me, ye cursed,
inherit the kingdom prepared for you	(depart) unto fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
from the foundation of the world.	(fire) which is eternal.

The devil and his angels

The “everlasting fire” spoken of here presents no difficulty to those who have already recognized the idiom of Gehenna destruction which Jesus not infrequently made use of. This is total destruction, and for ever (cp. Mt.13 :42; Mk.9:43-49).

But who are “the devil and his angels”? Two possible meanings present themselves. The very closeness of the parallelism just tabulated suggests that just as the blessing of the kingdom is “prepared for you”, i.e. the worthy, so also the eternal retribution is “prepared for the devil and his angels”, i.e. the unworthy. They are called this because although nominally Christ’s, they have been dedicated to an ecclesia of evil.

Alternatively, this may be read as an anticipation of the vigorous symbolism of the Book of Revelation-the Beast and the False Prophet are both cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone! (19 :20); “the dragon fought, and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven” (that is, within the scope of God’s purpose, the heavenly tabernacle). This opens up the possibility that the Lord’s condemnation of the unworthy will sentence them to share the fate of the ungodly world in the same way that Lot’s wife was involved in the fate of Sodom. There is something inherently fitting about this-that those who, though in Christ, have been worldly in spirit, should share the holocaust of tribulation which the world will experience at that time. The destiny of the foolish virgins, shut out of the wedding feast (Mt.25 :10), and of the man without a wedding garment consigned to weeping and gnashing of teeth in outer darkness, both suggest the same idea.

What punishment?

Perhaps there is the same implication behind the final censure: “these shall go away into everlasting punishment.” It is doubtful whether the word here translated “punishment” is appropriate to describe the nothingness of eternal oblivion, which indeed many of the godless today deem to be no punishment at all. It may be that the “punishment of the (millennial) age” will actually consist of further mortal existence which not only experiences the dire troubles of the chaos which begets a new world but also involves living on for a while into the blessed peace and loveliness of Messiah’s kingdom. What better punishment to fit the crime of doing despite to the gospel of the kingdom of God? Then, truly, “a sinner being a hundred years old shall be accursed” (Is.65 :20) and positively pitied instead of being congratulated on his longevity.

The self-vindication of the rejected is a concentrated essence of self-righteousness: “Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?” It has been well said that “the righteous in their answer dwell on each particular, in each respect finding themselves wanting, whereas the unrighteous in their reply, pass over all these neglected duties in a more summary, self-confident way.” This is king Saul’s self-justification when he was discarded: “I have performed the commandment of the Lord” (1 Sam. 15 :13). And in Christ’s earlier picture of the Last Judgment: “Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?” Assuredly in that day there will be small encouragement for any who would depend on their own achievements.

Jesus turned abruptly from this sad prospect to the happiness of others: “the righteous shall go into life eternal.” What a conclusion for his great prophecy!

Notes: Mt. 25:31-46.

31.	Immortality at Jerusalem: ls.25 :7,8; 4:2,3; Ps.133; 87:5,6; 102:18-21; Joel 2 :28,32;Mt.27:52,53.
33.	Set the sheep; s.w. Lk.21 :36.
40.	Ye have done it unto me. For further emphatic development of this theme, consider: Mt.10 :40-42; 18 :5; Jn.13 :20; Acts 9:4; Heb.6 :6,10; Pr.19 :17; 1 Cor.8 :12.

“Immediately, after the tribulation of those days (Mk: in those days, after that tribulation), shall the sun be darkened, and the moon will not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven” (Mt.). Jesus was now becoming more and more explicit about the signs of his return. Luke’s phrase is “signs in the sun, and in the moon and in the stars,” but he goes on to add: “and upon the earth distress of nations with perplexity (s.w. Gen.32 :7; ls.8 :22; Lev.26 :6), the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them for fear and for looking after (s.w. 2 Pet.3 :12-14) those things which are coming on the earth.”

Identification of the “tribulation” alluded to is not exactly easy. If this is a reference back to the earlier part of the prophecy (Mt.24 :9,21), then in the last days the expectant believer is bidden look either for a persecution of a faithful remnant (“Then shall they deliver you up unto tribulation”) or else for a devastation of the state of Israel (“Then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be”).

Sun, moon, and stars

With the passing of years there is, rightly, a steadily decreasing enthusiasm for the political and ecclesiastical interpretation of the symbolism of “sun, moon, and stars” which was first propagated by Daubuz, the French Protestant expositor. The idea that “heaven is a figure for political power” has only the flimsiest support in Scripture. There are hardly any passages which help out this figurative interpretation of the “sun”, and none at all for the “moon”. It is high time this unsatisfactory notion were let go, especially since there are so many plain Bible passages which associate these symbols with Israel. For study of the Olivet prophecy, the outstanding one, which is by itself altogether decisive, is Jeremiah 31 :35,36; “Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; the Lord of hosts is his name. If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.” Here again, and here only, is the remarkable combination of “sun, moon, and stars” with “sea and waves roaring,” as in Luke 21. Clearly, Jesus was making deliberate allusion to the Jeremiah passage. The one Scripture interprets the other.

An Isaiah passage also is relevant here: “I am the Lord thy God, that divided the sea (i.e. at the Exodus), whose waves roared” (51:15). Thus, “the sea and the waves roaring” suggests another stupendous divine deliverance at a time when His people are at the limit of endurance. The next verse goes on: “I will plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth (i.e. a completely new order), and say unto Zion, Thou art my people.”

Thus the signs given by Jesus call for an essentially Jewish interpretation. Bible prophecy takes account of world politics or other world forces only when they are intimately concerned with Israel. This is a principle never to be lost sight of. (See Notes).

In this prophecy, however, Jesus gives hints of wider scope regarding Israel’s tribulation in the last days: “On the earth distress of nations (Gentiles) with perplexity . . . men’s hearts failing them (men dropping dead) for fear and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth” Whilst the first of these expressions could mean “distress caused by Gentiles in the Land”-and the word “perplexity” has special association with the tribulation of Israel (Lev. 26 :I6; Dt. 28 :22; Is. 5:30; 8:20 LXX) -the final word (oikoumene; here translated ‘earth’) requires wider reference outside Israel. And the figure of roaring waves might suggest the destruction of a civilisation (Jer.51 :55; 50 :42). In some places it is also an expression of irrepressible joy at the powerful presence of the Lord (Ps.96:11-13; 98 :7-9), but is that possible here?

But what did Jesus mean by the portentous expression: “the powers of heaven shall be shaken”? Was he returning yet again to the familiar figure for Israel? Or is the phrase starkly literal, intimating rather frighteningly that the terrifying surge of evil in the world will then be so chaotic and fierce as to be almost beyond the competence of the angels, “the powers of heaven,” to control. When consideration is given to such a mysterious incident as he combined experience of archangels Gabriel and Michael, described in Daniel 10 :12,13, this suggestion is hardly as outlandish as might at first be thought. Even when Michael the chief prince stands up on behalf of God’s people there is nevertheless a time of trouble for Israel such as never was (Dan.12:l).

There is, of course, the possibility of a more literal meaning. Not infrequently Bible figures of speech prove to have a remarkable element of literality about them (e.g. 2 Pet.3 :7,10,12; ls.24 :18). The sophistication of the signs in the sky in this generation has become almost common place; and what further signs are yet to be seen is past the imagination of a layman to conceive. It is known that Russia’s sputniks now orbiting the earth number nearly five hundred. And the amount of hardware put into space by the Americans must be something of the same order. These immense projects (leaving out of consideration such awe-inspiring operations as moon and Mars landings) are clearly intended to be of a grim practical use when the childish rivalries of the super-powers reach detonation point. Then, assuredly, there will be many a literal sign in the heavens; the powers of the heavens will be shaken!

The sign of the Son of man

And at such a time, Jesus assured his disciples in specially impressive terms, “shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven.” These words can only mean a sign portending the personal return of Christ. In “The Last Days,” chapter 9, it has been argued in detail that these words make most sense when taken literally as intimating an extraordinary sign in the sky, seen by all the world. To assume some figurative meaning as, for example, the uprise of the state of Israel, is to strain the language in a most unBiblical fashion. The word “appear” (phaino) in nearly every occurrence describes a vision of divine glory, And, in any case, this “sign of the Son of man” is to be apparent after the other signs have all been witnessed.

At the birth of Jesus there was an unmistakable sign in the sky-the Shekinah Glory of the Lord (Study 9), And, time and again, Jesus assured his disciples that he would return “in the glory of his Father” (Mt.16 :27; 26 :64). indeed there is hardly a Scripture which speaks in any detail about the coming of the Lord which does not employ, in some way or another, the idiom of Ezekiel’s description or the Cherubim of Glory.

Thus, the actual sight of Jesus returning “In power and great glory” will be the sign that his advent is imminent. Some find difficulty in idea of the Son of man being himself the sign, but indeed they ought not; cp. Lk.2:12,34; ls.7 :14; Jn.2 :18,19; Rev. l:7; Num.24 :17; compare also the idea in Ex.3 :12.

To be sure, the astonishing unique spectacle will not be understood by the vast majority of the world’s population. Completely sold on the idea that science can find a naturalistic explanation for everything, they will shrug off this last momentous warning as some new kind of Russian (or American) space device.

However, there are indications in more than one prophecy of the end time that this awe-inspiring return of the Lord will be in a day of supernatural darkness comparable to that which the gospels associate with the day of crucifixion (Mt.27:45; see Notes).

Mourning

An immediate consequence of the appearance of the sign will be that “all tribes of the earth mourn”. If here, as in so many other places, the word “earth” should be replaced by “the Land” (see Notes); then this is the equivalent of Zechariah 12 :10,12: “they shall look upon me (Heb. unto me) whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for his only son . . . And the land shall mourn, every family apart . . .” This is the national repentance of Israel when face to face with their rejected Messiah . . .” all the tribes of the Land will mourn.”

The difficulty in this view is that the passage precedes that which announces Christ’s actual return: “and they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” Revelation 1 :7 reverses the order of these details: “Behold, he cometh with the clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all the tribes of the earth (the Land?) shall wail because of him.” “See” in the sense of mental perception will not do here. The Greek word commonly describes a literal seeing, often of divine glory (cp. also Mt.24 :26,27; 2 Th. 2 :7-10). The close resemblance of this Zechariah passage to Matthew 24 :30 should surely require it to be read as an interpretation. In that case, there is •here a strong indication that the details in Matthew 24 are not always given in precisely the order in which they will transpire. This phenomenon in prophecies of the Last Days is by no means unusual (Zech.14, Ez.38, Rev.19, 20 are familiar examples; see “Revelation”, H.A.W.p.76).

The alternative interpretation disregards any possible alignment with Zechariah 12 and Revelation 1, and gives “all the tribes of the earth” a world-wide reference to a period of universal misery and suffering at the time of the Lord’s coming. This will almost certainly be the case, as Luke 21 :25,26 very ominously requires. So perhaps the distinction between the two views is merely technical. However, where Israel is concerned, Zechariah 12 :10 supplies the special reason—the nation will at last turn in deep self-humiliation to God because in their extremity they will have no-one else to turn to.

“The clouds of heaven”

The picture of “the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven” is taken straight from Daniel 7:14. The only difference of any consequence is that in Daniel the Son of man is brought to the Ancient of Days, i.e. at the Ascension; whereas now the same language is harnessed to describe the Lord’s return in glory from the Ancient of Days.

There is little to recommend the view that the Ancient of Days is Christ, and the Son of man is the saints. None of the frequent New Testament allusions to this passage offers a vestige of support: e.g. Mt. 26 :64; 16 :27; Rev. l :7,13; 14 :14; Acts 7:55; Jn. 3 :13; 5 :27. Mt. 24,25 uses the title “Son of man” no less than eight times.

The phrase “clouds of heaven” is explained by “power and great glory.” There is invariable association of these ideas. When Israel was in the wilderness the Glory of the Lord was seen in the pillar of cloud and fire. The same cloud filled the temple of Solomon at its dedication (1 Kgs.8 :10). Ezekiel saw the Cherubim of Glory in “a great cloud and a fire infolding itself” (1 :4). At the Transfiguration, the Cloud of the Glory moved from Law and Prophets to Christ and the preachers of the Gospel (Lk.9 :34). The same Cloud received Jesus at his ascension (Acts 1 :9), and will be manifest to “the tribes of the earth” when he returns. The concordance suggests some interesting extensions of this idea.

When?

There is a strange paradox in the teaching of Jesus about the time of his coming again. He was most emphatic that “of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father” (Mk.). Nevertheless he insisted that his disciples be watchful and prepared, and he thereupon gave emphatic signs by which the epoch might be anticipated.

The Lord’s personal ignorance of the precise time of his coming again is, to say the least, remarkable. One conclusion, of special importance to enthusiasts for computation of prophetic periods, seems inescapable-this finest Bible student of all time, who had himself commended the prophecy of Daniel to the special attention of his disciples (Mt.24 :15), was evidently unable to use his inspired skill on that inspired book to learn when the Last Day would be, and therefore it ill becomes any of his disciples to assume an insight which will outmatch that of the Master in its results. Fuller, a level-headed but unexpectedly humourous Puritan commentator, puts it this way: “In such peremptory particularising of the very years, such as pretend to plough with the heifers of God’s Spirit may be suspected to be drawn away with the wild bulls of their own imaginations” (Pisgah Sight; p.634). It would be well to face the fact honestly that the methods used for the calculation of prophetic periods have been inherited from writers of the apostasy who are all known to be hopelessly astray on a score of basic Bible truths. Then is it likely that such men may be followed with confidence in their speculations regarding abstruse and mysterious prophecies of Scripture? No less than four times in the rest of His Olivet prophecy (Mt.24 :42,44,50; 25 :13) Jesus declared with all possible emphasis: “Ye know neither the day nor the hour.” “It shall be one day (i.e. a day of outstanding importance) which is known unto the Lord” (Zech. 14 :7) — and only to Him—the day when “the Lord my God shall come, and all the holy ones with thee.”

Nevertheless, the scanning of signs of the Lord’s return is not to be neglected. He wished his disciples to be alerted-even though they could not know the precise time-by an eagerness to “discern the signs of the times.”

The fig tree

Foremost among these warnings is the sign of the fig tree:

“Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; when they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand. So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand” (Lk.). The emphasis here is intended to be put on the fig tree. Matthew and Mark omit “and all the trees.”

The parable of the fig tree in the vineyard (Lk.13 :6-9; Study 131) and the acted parable of the cursing of the fig tree (Mk.11 :12-14; Study 159) both reinforce the meaning of this new fig tree parable. Its springing to life portends the revival of national Israel, a remarkable historical development witnessed by this generation.

Job’s little parable is an eloquent parallel worthy to be set alongside that of his Redeemer: “There is hope of a tree if it be cut down, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease. Though the root thereof wax old in the earth, and the stock thereof die in the ground (Mk. 11:20); yet through the scent of water it will bud, and bring forth boughs like a plant” (Job 14 :7-9). But as yet (at the time of writing) Israel has hardly caught “the scent of water”. The signs of repentance in the nation are there, but only in meagre fashion.

But in his parable Jesus made no mention of fruit. The resurrection of the state of Israel has been purely political. The Chosen Race is little nearer to faith in God or His Messiah than they were when the dispersion began. Leaves only! But a sign, nevertheless, as specific in character as anyone could wish for.

“Behold the fig tree and all the trees.” This century which has seen Israel re-established has also seen the same kind of remarkable politico! revival, though for vastly different reasons, in the nations which surround Israel. Oil and the rivalries of the super-powers have given the Arab neighbours, ringing Israel, a political consciousness and importance which it was beyond the power of any 19th century student of Bible prophecy to foresee. Thus, today, this shortest of all parables provides in all its details as plain an intimation as could be wished for that “the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.”

“This generation”

How nigh? The Lord’s answer is: “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away till all be fulfilled.” The phrase: “this generation” was designedly ambiguous (e.g. Lk.7 :31), but today it can only mean: “this generation which witnesses the reviving of life in the ‘fig tree.’ When Jesus was foretelling the tribulation of Israel he said explicitly: “All these things shall come on this generation.” Within forty years (as also in Heb.3 :10) all was fully accomplished. Then from what date is this final forty year period to be measured? From 1948? This should provide a definitive terminus ad quern. So even though the Lord’s pronouncement allows of fulfilment before the end the of the generation specified, readers of his words cannot take the warning too seriously: “even at the doors” (Lk.l2:36; Rev.3:20; Jas.5:9).

As though his emphasis was still woefully inadequate, Jesus added: “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words (about this coming in glory) shall not pass away.” Was this a hyperbole to drive home his exhortation? Or was it an interpretative allusion to the warning and comfort of Isaiah? : “The heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die like gnats: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished” (51 :6-the entire context regarding Israel is worth careful attention; cp. Jer.31 :35,36).

The days of Noah

The Lord added further signs to be heeded by the faithful remnant alert for his coming: “As it was in the days of Noah . . . as it was in the days of Lot. . .even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed” (Lk.17 :26-30). These comparisons are more strong and exact than the AV “as”, would seem to indicate. Accordingly, the Flood is pointedly used by Peter as a figure of the more horrific destruction by fire which is yet to come (2 Pet.3 :6,7). The same cataclysm provides also a type of the Lord’s faithful in safety-the water which destroyed the wicked was the very means of ensuring the safety of the elect (1 Pet.3 :20,21).

It is surely significant here that Jesus made a distinction between “the day that Noah entered into the ark” and the day when “the flood came and took them all away.” The Genesis narrative (7 :1,10) interposes an interval of one week here. The Almighty’s judgment of an evil generation does not involve the elect. Compare the angel’s words to Lot: “I cannot do anything till thou be come thither” (Gen . 1 9 :22) .

“Eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage” is the aspect of antediluvian life which Jesus specially reprobated. Not that any of these things is wrong in itself. It is obsession with this materialistic and self-indulgent level of human existence which is to bring the judgment of God on this world of the ungodly. There are four aspects of this spreading corruption which call for special attention.

1. The blurring of the lines of distinction between those marked out as the Lord’s people and those with no such pretensions (Gen.6:2,3).
2. “The earth was filled with violence” (6:11).
3. “The earth was corrupt before Cod” (6 :11), i.e. its religion was entirely apostate.
4. “Every imagination of the thought of man’s heart was only evil continually” (6 :5)-a deliberate wilful dedication to all forms of evil. There is no need for any elaborate demonstration of the close resemblance provided by modern society. The days of Noah and the present year of dis-grace fit each other as a hand fits a glove.
5. “They knew not until the flood came” (Mt.24 :39). But they did know, for they had Noah, a preacher of righteousness (2 Pet. 2:5), and the witness of the building of the ark. So the Lord’s words must mean: ‘they refused to know, they were disobedient'(1 Pet. 3:20).

The days of Lot

And so also with the days of Lot, only here Christ’s stress on the close similarity with the last days is even more emphatic: “after the same manner” (RV). (Note the force of the Greek adverbs: homoios . . . kathos . . . kata to auto; Lk. 17:28, 30).

Again the type in Genesis 19 suggested by these words is instructive: Sodom’s wickedness before God; its particular vice; Lot’s reprobation of the evil; his prayers about it; Abraham’s intercession for the faithful; the mission of angels; their reception with unleavened bread; persecution; few worthy to be brought out; the last warning rejected; instead, mockery; flight to safety as day dawns; destruction held back; a city of refuge provided; “do not look back”; but Lot’s wife did, and shared the fate of the wicked; fire and brimstone as the sun arises.

Again Jesus painted a picture of a civilisation wholly concerned with its materialistic way of life (though apparently the people of Sodom were even further gone in wickedness-they did not bother to “marry or give in marriage”!)

Both positively and negatively Jesus warned against involvement with the world of the ungodly and its materialism: “Remember Lot’s wife … he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away.” The words counsel not so much haste as separateness: “Depart ye, depart ye, go ye out from thence, touch no unclean thing; go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean, that bear the vessels of the Lord” (ls.52 :11). It is he who is willing to “lose his life (Gk: soul-the natural man; Studies 129,169) who shall preserve it.”

Angels and the elect

Emphasis on God’s protection of the faithful in these typical judgments is not to be missed. Not only in the times of Noah and Lot, but also in the days of Hezekiah and Jeremiah and Daniel, and in A.D. 70. And in all these instances there was first warning, and then judgment.

But how preserved from a devastation comparable to the Flood or to the extinction of Sodom? The Lord’s answer is: “The Son of man shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the one end of heaven to the other” (Mt.). In the New Testament, without exception, the “elect” are the saints in Christ. But other terminology in this passage seems more appropriate to Israel. The “trumpet” suggests the means of rallying the tribes of Israel or a summons calling the elders of the people (Num.10 :2,4,7,10; Lev.23 :24). And the “four winds” is an expression specially associated with Israel (Dt. 4:32; 30:4; Zech.2:6LXX; Ez.37 :9). For these reasons some have interpreted this verse with reference solely to the Jews, the elect nation. However, other New Testament passages appropriate these “Israel” features to the saints, the New Israel of God; e.g. “the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first” (1 Th. 4:16). “The trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed” (1 Cor.15 :52). “Four angels . . . holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth . . . till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads” (Rev. 7 :1,4). Also, 2 Thessalonians 2 :1 seems to be a clear allusion to this Olivet prediction: “our gathering together unto him.” Compare also Mt.13:41,49; ls.27:13.

This gathering of the saints is not to be associated with a secret unperceived coming of their Lord, for the words in Mark are quite explicit: “Then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And then shall he send his angels . . . (13 ;26,27). How is it that this detail has come to be overlooked through so many generations by those who have persuaded themselves otherwise?

There is some difficulty with what follows: “… gather his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven” (13 :27). This last phrase perhaps becomes most intelligible when equated with Paul’s description of saints being “caught away in (Shekinah) clouds, into the air, for the purpose of meeting the Lord (at Jerusalem)” (1 Th.4 :17). But a similar use of Greek prepositions elsewhere (e.g. Acts 8 :10; Heb.8 :11) suggests the idea of a complete gathering of the elect from wherever they are to be found.

But where the meeting with the Lord is to take place will doubtless remain a matter for difference of opinion until it has actually happened. Only Seventh Day Adventists and such argue that it will be in mid-air or in heaven. Some locate it at Mount Sinai, but much more specific Bible evidence points to Jerusalem. (The details are explored in “The Last Days”, chapter 10).

The Lord gave a series of dramatic snapshots of the actual removal of his saints from their normal routine: a woman is snatched away from grinding corn, a man disappears from his ploughing, another leaves his bedfellow and is gone. “One taken, and the other left.” But equally possible is the view that the Lord speaks of two believers, one of whom is willing to respond to the angelic call and the other not. “Remember Lot’s wife” chimes in remarkably well with this idea.

Eagles and carcase

So also does the Lord’s little parable about vultures and carcase. The disciples, intrigued by what Jesus had revealed, asked: “Where, Lord?” The usual assumption that they meant: “Taken where, Lord?” is possible. But this requires that, in the parable, Christ to whom they are taken is represented by the carcase, and the saints by vultures. The mind revolts at the gross unseemliness of such a similitude.

Alternatively, the question could mean: “Left where, Lord?”-with the implication: We know that those taken away are taken to safety, as happened to Lot, but what is the fate of those who are left? The Lord’s answer would now mean: “Those who are spiritually dead, a carcase, are left to the vultures—they share all the evil which the world experiences in that time of turmoil.”

One advantage of this interpretation is that in the completely different context in which the parable was spoken in Matthew (24 :28), a remarkably similar meaning is clearly required. There Jesus had been warning against false prophets. “Wherefore, if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: if they say, Behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not . . .” In this context, the meaning would appear to be : If you show yourselves to be spiritually dead, a carcase, you will surely get these vultures, the false teachers, round you.

Read thus, in both places where Jesus used it, this vigorous gruesome little parable becomes a very grim warning to saints in Christ who are not eager and alert for the coming of their Lord.

Precisely when, in the divine programme, this gathering of believers unto the Lord will take place is not a question to be answered with confidence. But there are four considerations which suggest that this will be after he is enthroned in Jerusalem as King of the Jews:

	a.	“Then shall he send his angels. . . (Mk.13 :27], i.e. after he has been seen coming in power and glory.
	b.	When the judgment of those gathered before him takes place, the king sits on the throne of his glory, i.e. in Jerusalem (Mt.25:31).
	c.	“First that which is natural; then that which is spiritual” (1 Cor.15 :46). If this is a general principle, the issue is settled.
	d.	Revelation 11 :17-19 strongly suggests this sequence:
		i	The reign of Christ established (in Jerusalem).
		ii	The kings of the earth rise up, in vain, against the Messiah.
		iii	The resurrection.
		iv	The rewarding of the saints.
		v	Judgment on an ungodly world.
		vi	A climax of theophany

Notes: Mt.24:29-41

29.	Immediately. Here, unexpectedly, is one “of Mark’s favourite words appropriated by Matthew-and not used in the parallel passage by Mark.
	Sun, moon, stars. Other passages in which Israel is alluded to by this symbolism: Gen.37 :9,10; 15 :5; 22 :17; Amos 8 :8-10; Micah 3 :6; S.of S. 6 :10; ls.24 :23; Jer.33 :20-26; JI.2 :10,30-32; 3 :15; Acts 2 :20; Rev.6 :12; 8:12; 12:1. For details see “The Time of the End” (by H.A.W.), chapter 11. Also ls.13 :10; 34 :4, when properly interpreted.
30.	They shall see. Why the change of pronoun to “ye” in v.33?
	The sign of the Son of man, accompanied by unnatural darkness: Mt.24 :19; Zech.14 :6; JI.2 :2; Zeph.l :15; Am.5 :20; 8 :9; ls.13 :10;5 :30; 24 :23.
	All the tribes of the earth mourn. The N.T. has over 40 examples of this use of the Greek word ge, and LXX has over a thousand, with the meaning “Land”.
	Mourn… see, Gk: kopsontai… opsontai – a designed paronomasia, only possible if Jesus spoke this in Gk. Is theros, thurais – summer, doors (v.32,33) – another example?
31.	Send his angels. This anticipates 28:18 -the authority of Christ in heaven.
32.	The fig tree. Lk: “and all the trees” might be derived from Jl. 1:12. In that case, another allusion to Israel, but in what sense?
33.	It is near. Lk. 21:31 defines “it” as “the kingdom of God.”
34.	This generation. In classical usage genea means “race”, but in the LXX it carries the meaning assigned here.
36.	“If all the Olivet prophecy were an invention (as many moderns say) this verse could not be.”
37.	Coming. The J.W reading of this as an invisible parousia is vetoed by Lk. 17:30: “apocalypsed.”
38.	Marrying and giving in marriage, to ensure a next generation. What a dramatic irony!

“Your house is left unto you desolate” (Mt.23 :38). And Jesus accompanied by the twelve, left the temple. He had made his last appeal. He had spoken his last warning to the nation and its leaders.

As they were leaving, one of the apostles, Peter probably (see Notes), less oppressed by the solemnity of the occasion than he should have been, enthusiastically (or perhaps in an effort to persuade his Lord to go back on his sombre pronouncement) drew attention to some of the impressive features of that noble assembly of buildings: “Master, see what manner of stones, and what buildings!” Matthew’s text seems to carry the idea: ‘You ask me to look and admire. Instead I ask you to look and lament.’

The Wonder of the World

There was some excuse for pride. For nearly fifty years (Jn.2 :20) royal revenue and national effort had combined to make this temple the most majestic erection in the world. It had double cloisters, profuse ornamentation of red and white marble, great monolithic columns, and elegant decorations such as the great candelabrum and the golden vine, provided by Herod, which had bunches of grapes as tall as a man. Since the temple was still unfinished, it is not unlikely that there were some recent additions calling forth special admiration.

In his “Recovery of Jerusalem” Wilson, the nineteenth century archeologist, invites his readers to imagine “a building longer and higher than York Cathedral, standing on a solid mass of masonry almost equal in height to the tallest of our church spires.” In those foundations were blocks of limestone of fantastic size. Josephus (Ant. 15.11.2) gives the dimensions of some as 25 by 8 by 12 cubits (and the cubit was at least half a yard), all of them precision cut and bevelled; and some, he adds, were 45 cubits long. Even after making due allowance for Josephus’ undoubted weakness for exaggeration when dealing with numbers of any sort, it is evident that some astonishing engineering had gone into the erection of this sanctuary now deserted by the Glory of the Lord.

The phrase: “goodly stones and gifts” (Lk.), deliberately introduces a word marvellously like “anathema, curse,” This doom Jesus now went on to pronounce: “As for these things which ye behold, the days will come in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down” (the negatives here are very emphatic).

It was a terrifying imprecation, from which any Jew would shrink away incredulous. Yet it had been foretold long before by Micah the prophet: “Therefore Zion for your sake shall be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the mountain of the House (i.e. the altar; Ez.43 :15 mg) as the (deserted) high places of the forest” (3 :12). The context of these words was wonderfully apt-a searing denunciation of the nation’s leaders comparable to that which Jesus himself had spoken that very day (Mt.23) to men whose philosophy was: “Is not the Lord among us? none evil can come upon us.”

In the days of good king Hezekiah reformation had brought indefinite deferment of the fulfilment of these grim words (Jer.26:18,19) but now the one Man who could intercede on behalf of the unholy city was about to be done to death by it.

When these horrific events came to pass, the words seem to have been literally fulfilled. In the assault on Jerusalem Titus gave strict instructions that the temple was to be spared. Yet the entire complex of buildings has disappeared without trace. Today nothing is known about the lay-out of the temple area—only that the temple was there, somewhere. So far as is known, orify two of the temple stones have been identified -those which carry an inscription threatening death to any Gentile going beyond the Soreg, the “middle wall of partition.” The Law of Moses had pronounced that when it was indubitably established, that a house had “leprosy” (dry rot?) in its fabric, it was to be utterly demolished, and “they shall pour out the dust that they scrape off without the city into an unclean place” (Lev.14 :41). Thus also the leprous house of God in Jerusalem. It meant an end to the Law of Moses, for sacrifices and atonement were at the very heart of that system, and without temple and altar none of the rest would be possible.

Were the twelve incredulous, or aghast, or too busy talking hard among themselves to take up the matter with Jesus immediately? It was not until they had descended the oblique path to the Kidron, and had breasted the mount of Olives directly opposite the temple, that they plied him with questions about it. And then it was only four of them, who asked him, apart from the rest, as he now sat looking sadly across to the temple area. Four out of twelve, and these four his first disciples (Jn.1 :40,41: Study 20) and closest to him! Not all the Lord’s servants have a burning zeal for greater knowledge about the prophecies of Holy Scripture. Now, as then, enlightenment in this field comes to those who are persistent in their enquiries.

Pressing Questions

They asked three questions: “Tell us (note here how insistent they were), when shall these things be (the destruction of the temple)? and what shall be the sign (one particular sign) of thy coming, and of the consummation of the age?” The grim character of the Lord’s prediction was accepted without demur or expostulation. But they assumed that the day which brought the temple to ruin must necessarily be the great climax bringing in Messiah’s regeneration of all things. On this confusion between distinct events Jesus did not disillusion them—possibly because he could not, for even the Son of man did not know the time of his return in glory (Mk.13 :32). They had heard him speak of his coming again: “Ye shall not see me until ye say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord” (Mt.23 :39). And from his own instruction they knew that “the consummation of the age” meant the Day of Judgment (Mt.13 :39,40: so also Dan.l2:4,7LXX).

The immediate reply of Jesus was only a summary; it included a brief anticipation of the events heralding the Last Day (Lk.21 :10,11), but for a while he concentrated mostly on the crisis of the temple’s overthrow, and the chain of trials and catastrophes leading up to it. All students of the Olivet prophecy find themselves beset- with problems as to when the Lord intended reference to the fall of Jerusalem and when to the time of his coming. (For suggestions regarding these difficulties, see “The Time of the End,” ch. 14, by H.A.W.).

First, then, a solemn warning against being misled by false Messiahs claiming for themselves: “I AM hath sent me unto you” (Ex.3 :14), and: “The time is at hand.” Before he was through, Jesus was to recur to this warning as specially needful (Mt.24 ill,13-28). Those of his disciples who are most eager to see Messiah’s return in their own time are specially liable to be deceived by imposters. If not by false Christs, then by equally false religious interpreters claiming special prophetic power and authority. The repeated exhortations to caution are very urgent: “Take heed that ye be not deceived (Lk.) . . . Many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many … believe it not… go not forth .. . Behold, I have told you before (Mt.).”

The other technical term used here for the second coming—parousia—means, strictly, presence; and accordingly it has been much misinterpreted by “Jehovah’s Witnesses” as necessarily meaning an invisible presence of the Lord since 1914. It requires one minute with a good concordance to expose the utter falsity of such a notion. Such passages as 1 Cor. 16:17; 2 Cor. 7:6; 10:10; Phil. 1:26; 2:12 make nonsense of the idea of an Invisible presence. In fact, in the first century, parousia was normally used to describe the visit of Caesar to one of his provinces—definitely not an invisible coming.

Social collapse

Another test of a very different kind would prove to be the violent national disturbances which were imminent—”wars and commotions,” such as the occasion when twenty thousand Jews were slaughtered in Caesarea (Jos.B.J.2.18.1). Prophecies of this kind surely sounded strangely in the ears of disciples who lived under the settled pox Romana. A period of increasing chaos, such as Judaea experienced in the generation after Christ, would not only trouble the disciples then but make them increasingly confident that the End was near.

“Not so! “counselled Jesus, “wars and rumours of wars must not unsettle you. Neither the end of the temple, nor the end of the age, comes immediately.” At this point he broke into the main thread of his discourse to explain what The End would be like (Lk.21 :10,11). “Nation against nation, and kingdom against kingdom” was hardly possible, except on the smallest scale, in the first century, because of the iron domination of Rome everywhere. Here, surely, Jesus was foretelling a complete breakdown of law and order in the Last Days, these evils being accentuated by “famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes in divers places.” Yet even such an accumulation of horror would be only “the beginning of travail.”. It, .would mean the, traumatic new spiritual birth of Israel and thus of the Messianic Kingdom.

This phraseology—’nation against nation, and kingdom against kingdom’—is very reminiscent of Isaiah 19 :2, where the context seems to require reference to civil war. Is it remarkable that today most nations of the world have such problems of racial minorities and a marked trend towards terrorism that there is now fair prospect of a complete collapse of ordered society? It is the kind of development that could come with frightening suddenness, and especially in Israel.

Persecution

But more immediately there was to be a period of intense Jewish animosity and persecution of Christian believers: “They shall deliver you up to councils and in the synagogues ye shall be beaten” (Mk .). The story of the Book of Acts was to prove the truth of this prophecy. (Acts4:3;5:18;8:3; 12:4; 16:24; 22:4; 26:10). The Gentile authority of “kings and governors” would be organized against the new movement. Far from being demoralised by such hardships, the disciples must rejoice in this experience as a great opportunity for public witness: “It shall turn to you for a testimony,” the best of all possible advertisements. (Or could these words mean: “It will prove to you that all is going right, according to the will of God”?)

They could face these persecutions with confidence and complete freedom from worry. No need for anxiety beforehand about how best to testify. (Luke uses the technical term for preparing a speech). The Faith of Christ would not be brought to shame. More than adequate guidance would be afforded them through the gifts of the Holy Spirit in the early church. “I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay, nor resist” (Lk; c.p. Mt. 10:20).

The Lord made no promise of easy deliverance. Although Scripture provides repeated assurance of protection of the faithful remnant when divine judgment comes on an ungodly world, there is never any promise of immunity from persecution. “They will deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you (Mt.)… Brother will deliver up brother to death (Mk.).” Even parents, kinsmen and friends (Lk.) would readily join in the persecution.

What was the look on the faces of those four apostles as they heard these things? In one way or another they were all to suffer personally in the cause of their Lord. Nevertheless (Jesus promised) they would become men of power, like Moses and like Jeremiah: “I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say . . . Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth” (Ex.4 :12; Jer. l :9). And so it turned out: “Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said unto them (the chief priests)…” (Acts 4 :8); “and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spake the word of God with boldness” (4 :31). There would be hatred in full measure, not because of any qualities of their own, but because they stood up uncompromisingly for the truth of Christ: “Hear the word of the Lord, ye that tremble at his word: Your brethren that dated you, that cast you out for my name’s sake, said, Let the Lord be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed” (ls.66 :5; the context is remarkable). In every way possible Jesus sought to assure his followers that persecution was not to be regarded as an evil: “There shall not an hair of your head perish” (Lk.21 :18; and this in spite of v.12,16).

This persecution passage, abundantly fulfilled in the first century, may well prove to have startling relevance in the Last Days also, when a remnant of Israelis believing in Jesus have to face the concentrated hatred of their bigoted fellows.

The disciple and his Lord

It is perhaps not inappropriate at this point to draw attention to a remarkable similarity which builds up in the Olivet prophecy between the trials and hardships foretold for the disciples and all that Jesus himself had to undergo in his last hours.

	Mark 13	Jesus
9.	Deliver you up to councils;	Before the Sanhedrin.
	Beaten in synagogues;	Buffetted by his adversaries.
	Before rulers and kings,	Chief priests and Herod and Pilate.
	for a testimony.	Confession before Pilate.
12.	Brother shall deliver up brother to death	Betrayed (s.w.) by his “own familiar friend”.
16.	Not turn back to take his garment	John Mark’s (?) linen garment.
17.	Woe to them with child, and them that give suck	On the road to Golgotha, the same lament (Lk.23:27,28).
20.	Days shortened.	The time in the tomb as short as possible, for “third day” to stand true.
22.	False Christs.	Barabbas.
	Deceive the very elect.	The repentant malefactor a former disciple (led astray by Barabbas; Study 230).
23.	I have foretold you all things.	Warning to the disciples of his sufferings.
24.	Sun darkened.	Darkness at crucifixion.
26.	Son of man coming in clouds.	This claim repeated at his trial (Mk.14 :62).
32.	Of that day and hour knoweth no man	The hour is come.
33.	Watch	Watch with me.
	and pray.	Prayer in Gethsemane.
35.	Ye know not when
	— at even	Last Supper
	— at midnight	Gethsemane
	— at cockcrow	Peter’s denials
	— in the morning.	Condemnation and crucifixion
36.	Find you sleeping	Disciples sleeping in Gethsemane.

These resemblances can hardly be accidental. They underline the important lesson (Jn.15 :20,21) that, in following Christ, the disciple will find in his own experience echoes of what his Lord had to undergo (see H.A.W: “Revelation”, ch.25; “Acts” ch.109).

Trials of yet another kind would assail the disciples: “And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of (the) many shall wax cold.” This was a blunt and shattering prophecy of failure. And so it came about. Many did renounce the Faith, many perverted it, the majority just drifted away.

Again, the student is bidden look for a further reference of these words to the last days, ‘for “iniquity shall abound” is the equivalent of “the wicked shall do wickedly” (Dan.12 :10), a passage which most certainly foretells the time of the end in Israel (see v. 11).

But, yet again, Jesus can be seen to be referring back to the last two verses of Daniel: “Blessed is he that waiteth (endureth)… at the end of the days” (12 :12,13). It is a further intimation of the repeat fulfilment of this part of the Olivet prophecy in modern times.

Early decay

It is usual, in commentaries and histories of the early church, to represent the progress of the Faith as steady and irresistible. But in fact such statements are true only of the apostasy which set in, and not of the true gospel of Christ. The primary cause of this decay was what might well be described as the Jewish counter-reformation. Throughout the New Testament there are indications enough that the hostile forces of Jewry, finding themselves unable to stifle the Faith by the power of Holy Scripture or by the evidence of indisputable facts, applied themselves to the classic technique of wrecking the new movement from within. (This is a large and complex subject, not to be developed here. Its staring point is Gal.2:4. See “Acts”, App. 3, HAW.

Thus, what Jesus was describing beforehand in this trenchant passage was the bitter discouragement of seeing his Truth being defeated by the powers of evil—members of the ecclesia of Christ betraying each other, false teachers working mischief amongst new converts (2 Pet.2 :1; 1 Jn.4 :1), and all kinds of wicked maneuvering by false brethren (2 Cor. 11 :26). All this happened on a big scale before ever Paul and Peter suffered martyrdom.

Jesus did not counsel denunciation or counter-violence, but simply the dogged holding on to truth which only faith can make possible: “He that endures to the end, the same shall be saved.” He did not mean the end of the Jewish dispensation. Holding on to the Faith until the signal judgments of A.D.70 arrived was not outstandingly meritorious in itself. “Be thou faithful unto death,” was the exhortation of Christ to his hard-pressed brethren (Rev.2 :10). “Ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise . . . We are not of them that draw bad unto perdition, but of them that believe unto the saving of the soul” (Heb.10:36,39).

The prospect was by no means entirely discouraging. In spite of the many hindrances foreseen, the gospel would rapidly spread far and wide: “This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations” (Mt.). Strange paradox, that the message should make headway in spite of deceivers, Roman hostility, tribulation, treachery, hatred, dissension, love growing cold, and iniquity abounding. Yet, within thirty years, it was possible for Paul to quote, with reference to the preaching of the gospel: “Their sound went into all the earth, their words to the end of the world” (Ps.19:4; Rom.10:18). Andin all soberness he would write to the Colossians that “the gospel was preached to every creature which is under heaven … it is come unto you, as it is in all the world” (Col. l:23,6).

This work accomplished, the “end” that Jesus had first spoken of—the utter ruin of the temple and holy city—would be held back no longer: “Thus saith the Lord God unto the land of Israel: an end, the end is come upon the four corners of the land. Now the end is come upon thee, and I will send (unleash, hurry forth; Hebrew Piel) mine anger upon thee” (Ez.7 :2,3).

Notes: Mt. 24:1-14

1.	His disciples. Mk: one of his disciples. Since Mark is Peter’s gospel, and the phrase may be a Hebraism for ‘the leading apostle’, this was probably Peter.
2.	Thrown down. Evidently Stephen made use of this prophecy, for it was used against him at his trial; Acts 6:14.
3.	When Mt. compiled his gospel it was evidently still understood that all these three things would happen together. For much more on this, see “Revelation”, Appendix; H.A.W.
5.	Deceive Ominous repetition of an ominous word: v.4,11,24
6.	Hear…see…rumours (reports). Very apposite to the efficiency of modern news media.
	Must come to pass = Dan.2 :28LXX = also Rev. 1 :1.
	The end: Dan.9:26.
9.	Hated of all nations. Lk. adds: But there shall not a hair of your head perish. The Lord quotes 1 Sam. 14:45, and in turn in Acts 27:34 he quotes his own words. What a contrast in 2 Cor. 11:23ff.

Amongst the worshippers who had come up to Jerusalem for the Passover were a number of Greeks who were (so the text implies) worshippers, “proselytes of the gate”.

They came, most probably, from the cities of the Decapolis on the eastern side of Galilee. Of course they had not been without opportunity to see Jesus in the course of his repeated visits to their part of the countryside. But now there was a special purpose behind this present approach to him.

Jesus was teaching in the inner court from which they were rigidly excluded. So they seized the opportunity to appeal to Philip, who was possibly known personally to some of them: Would he persuade his Master to come into the outer court, the Court of the Gentiles, for their benefit? What a difference between their wish to see Jesus and that of Herod (Lk.23 :8)! The strong assertion of Jesus had gone round that this temple was to be “the house of prayer for all nations” (Mk. 11:17).

It is a likely guess that they came with a definite proposition:

‘Jesus, by your triumphal entry into Jerusalem you have proclaimed yourself the Messiah. Yet you will never be accepted as Messiah by the chief priests and Sanhedrin. They are all bitterly hostile to you. Then why not begin your Messianic kingdom in our part of the country where there is much sympathy for your cause and none of this entrenched opposition? The Jews of Galilee are enthusiastic about you, and they will give all support to this scheme.’

Several details in the text harmonize well enough with this reading of the situation.

They came to Philip as intermediary, feeling sure that he would help, for his name implied Greek sympathy and perhaps even an admixture of Greek ancestry.

From the first (Jn.l :44,45) Philip had been eager to find disciples for his lord, so he was willing enough to help now, for he knew the value of seeing as a ground for faith (1 :46; 14:8). Nevertheless mindful of Christ’s repeated emphasis on a mission to “the lost sheep of the house of Israel,” he hesitated, even though they addressed him-a disciple-as “Lord.”

He was unsure how to respond to this request, for earlier had not their Master instructed them: “Go not in the way of the Gentiles” (Mt.10:5)? So he went off to consult Andrew about it. This first of all evangelists (Jn.l :41) naturally added his encouragement to the idea, perhaps all the more readily because he had been specially impressed with so much in his Lord’s recent words and actions which suggested a leaning towards the Gentiles. So together they approached Jesus. These two had shown a common concern about the needs of the multitude when Jesus fed the five thousand (Jn.6 :5-9). And had not Jesus himself said: “If two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven” (Mt.l8:19)? And also this: “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out” (Jn.6 :37). Doubtless John foreshadowed here that it would be through the work of the apostles, and not by the direct ministry of Jesus, that Gentiles would come to the Faith.

The Son of man glorified

The reaction of Jesus now was extraordinary: “The hour is come that the Son of man should be glorified.” What, precisely, did he mean? The usage of the words “glory, glorify” in John’s gospel makes a study of considerable complexity. Here it must be sufficient to indicate the three powerful Messianic prophecies which lie behind the present allusion. (For details, see the end of Study 170).

There is Isaiah’s moving picture of a Messiah facing the discouragement of a people indifferent to his claims and his wonderful work: “I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain . . . Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified… Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord … I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the ends of the earth” (ls.49 :3-6). The appropriateness of these words to the context in John needs no explaining.

There is also the introduction to the outstanding prophecy of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 53: “Behold, my servant shall cause to understand, and shall be lifted up, and shall be glorified exceedingly (LXX) … so shall he sprinkle (i.e. cleanse) many nations” (52:13,15). Copious reference is made to both of these Scriptures in John 12.

But perhaps even more striking is the allusion to the Son of man prophecy in Daniel 7 :13,14: “Behold, one like unto the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days . . . And they offer all glory in service unto him (LXX), that all people, nations and languages should serve him.” When Jesus cried out: “Now is the Son of man glorifed,” he doubtless saw in the eager service of these Gentiles the first token of fulfilment of Daniel’s impressive vision.

A corn of wheat

Nevertheless his response to the proposition of these Greek believers must be: ‘No, I am here to die, and thus to bring forth much fruit. Your proposal would mean no fruit. The thought of the Isaiah passages had brought poignantly home to him that the path of heavenly glory was also the path of suffering:

“Verily, verily, I say unto you (and he was speaking now to both Jews and Gentiles), Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.” The principle of Life through death is basic to all God’s dealings with this race of mortal sinners: “that through death he might destroy him that hath the power of death” (Heb.2 :14); “that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection . . . being made conformable unto his death” (Phil.3 :10); “always delivered unto death for Jesus’ sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh” (2 Cor.4 :11); it is only the slaying of the burnt offering and its complete consumption on the altar which makes it “a sweet savour unto the Lord.”

Paul learned from his Master this figure of the planted seed (1 Cor. 15 :36). It is a parable to be interpreted not of the process of resurrection, but of the results of it. Thus: the seed in the ground represents the old life in Adam, declared by burial to be fit only for death; this “natural man” does not die at once but gradually; as he dies, the New Man in Christ grows (this is the plant growing out of the dying seed); ultimately there is “the full corn in the ear”-this is the life to come, resurrection life, like that which was planted, only much more glorious and abundant.

Jesus proceeded to apply the principle of self-sacrifice involved in his parable, first to himself, and then to his disciples. “He that loveth his soul is destroying it; and he that hateth his soul in this world shall keep it unto life (zoe) eternal.” The words are almost meaningless until it is realised that here, as in so many places in the New Testament, “soul” stands for all that belongs to the natural man, the old Adam (Lk.12 :19-23; Heb.4 :12; 1 Pet.1 :22; Rev.18 :14; Study 129). The tension and conflict in Jesus are summed up in his words: “Now is my soul troubled.”

And the like experience must come to every disciple also: “If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour.” This marked emphasis on first person pronouns would be insufferable egotism in any one else. Yet, such is the status and authority of Jesus, there is no hint of unseemliness in his words.

It may be that, as in a later section of this discourse (Study 171), there is here another of the many hidden “Moses” allusions which this gospel has. “Servant” is the word “minister”, one who serves in the presence of his Master, as Joshua did to Moses. The honour which came to Joshua is at least equalled by the honour God endows on the minister of His Son. But an important lesson Jesus impressed on these Greeks was: ‘You must come to me and my example, not I to you.’

The phrase: “where I am” is often read as referring prospectively to the future. But the context asks for a literal interpretation. Jesus was already in the throes of Gethsemane. The disciple must follow, and with many a lesser Gethsemane, must share his experience. In a similar, but not equal, sense he too must die in order to bring forth much fruit. So much written about Christ here must apply to the disciple also.

“Gethsemane”

John’s gospel supplies no detail of the Lord’s intense wrestling with self in Gethsemane, but his present discourse has all the marks of similar agonizing. It is John’s equivalent of what the Synoptists record (Mt.26:36-46; Mk.l4:32-42; Lk.22:30-46). Almost every phrase from v.24 to v.33 needs to be read carefully from this point of view. Jesus “oftimes resorted thither”-to Gethsemane (18 :2). This assuredly was one of those “Gethsemane” experiences.

“Now is my soul troubled;” he said, “and what shall I say? Shall I say, Father, save me from this hour?” (or, possibly: “Why should I say, Father save me from this hour?”). But for this cause came I unto this hour. No, I will rather say, Father, glorify thy name.”

How very close these words are to the prayer in Gethsemane! It was the soul of Jesus which turned away from the ordeal before him. But his spirit was willing. And now, as later, as always, that which was spiritual triumphed over that which was natural in him.

These anticipations of Gethsemane can be traced further:

v.26: “Where I am, there shall also my servant be.”

v.27: “This hour.”

v.29: “An angel spake to him.”

v.31: “The prince of this world.”

v.32: “Lifted up.”

v.33: “What death he should die.”

“Now is my soul troubled”(cp. 13:21; 11:33). Jesus was appropriating almost verbatim the words of Psalm 42 :6 LXX, a most intense psalm of David, written (very probably) at the time when he was hunted from his throne and from the holy city by Absalom and his rebels againstthe Lord’s anointed (see Study 214). In all kinds of ways the situation presented a God- contrived parallel to the rejection of Jesus by those who more than any should have acknowledged him. And as David found refuge beyond Jordan and support from his loyal guard of Gentile warriors (2 Sam.15 :18), so now Jesus gained new strength and encouragement from these Gentiles who honoured him with their reverence: “for this cause came I to this hour,” that, falling as a corn of wheat into the ground, he might bring forth much fruit; and it was also “for this cause (that he might be saved out of this hour; (Heb.5 :7RVm) that he was brought face to face with such dereliction.

A voice from heaven

The prayer of need Found immediate response from the Father in heaven: “There came therefore a voice from heaven (because such a prayer must be answered), I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.” Even in the unsuccessful mission to Israel, God had been glorified in the words of grace spoken by His Son, and in the winsome acts of compassion and power which he had displayed. Soon a yet wider ministry to the glory of God would take the gospel to Gentiles thirsty for good news of truth and righteousness. Accordingly Christ’s last word to his preachers was: “Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all nations” (Mt.28:19).

The voice from heaven brought reassurance to Jesus, as at his baptism (Lk.3 :21,22) and at his transfiguration (9 :35), but that was not its primary purpose: “This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes,” he explained to these eager Gentiles (Jn. 11:42). As Israel had heard the voice of God, a voice of thunder, when their covenant was inaugurated with sacrifice at Sinai, so now the Gentiles had a like experience when they were about to become sharers in the New Covenant. It may have been these Gentiles who were ready with their explanation of the impressive phenomenon. Although to them it was only a noise, they were immediately convinced that “an angel hath spoken (and is still speaking) to him.” But to the Jews in the throng it was nothing more than thunder. Thunder in spring-time! Yet even they would not have made so foolish a suggestion if there had not been heavy clouds in the sky over Jerusalem. The Daniel prophecy alluded to by Jesus tells of the “clouds” of heaven (the Shekinah Glory) round the glorified Son of man (Dan.7 :13)—from the mention of thunder some would infer clouds and lightning, not infrequent accompaniments of the Shekinah Glory. But these Jews, like the scientists of the twentieth century, would rather find “natural causes” as the explanation of this thunder than see and hear God at work in anything to do with Jesus of Nazareth. (For thunder as the Voice of God consider: Ex.19 :18,19; 20 :18; Ps.81 :7; 18:13; 29:3;ls.29:6).

The prince of this world

Nevertheless, whether they discerned it or not, this mighty Voice of God gave plain intimation that the Almighty had not abdicated, but was about to bring vast far-reaching changes in the Jewish kosmos: “Now is the judgment of this Mosaic order (see Notes): now shall the prince of this world be cast out” (contrast 6:37).

These are enigmatic expressions. Three times Jesus was to speak of “the prince of this world” (14 :30; 16 :11), yet in none of the three occasions is there a decisive context to settle the meaning of the words. Various suggestions are available:

1. The most familiar-that here the power of Sin is personified, as indeed it certainly is in other places. “God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom.8 :3). “Sin shall not have dominion over you . . . being made free from sin, ye became slaves of righteousness” (Rom.6 :14,18). But there are difficulties. “The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me,” implies a human adversary. And so also: “the Comforter will rebuke the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment … of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.” How is the abstract principle of Sin to be rebuked? This again suggests a person or human system.
2. Was Jesus alluding to the destroying angel of the Passover (Ex.12 :23)? There can be little doubt that he made at least one other reference to the world powers described from Egypt (Mt.26 :53). If this is the case, he now spoke of a greater deliverance-from the power of death. Through his sacrifice of himself this Lamb of God would, so to speak, judge the angel of judgment.
3. Interpreting in harmony with the earlier allusion to Daniel 7, “the prince of this world” can be given a literal meaning with reference to the world powers described in Daniel’s vision: “four kings which shall arise out of the earth.” Without the power and authority of the fourth of these, no crucifixion could take place. Yet the death of Christ guaranteed the ultimate abolition of all human might and dominion.
4. In this context Jesus had much to say about the rejection of Israel and the end of the Mosaic order. “Now is the judgment of this world” was, in that sense, literally true. So by “the prince of this world” he may have meant the high priest and the entire system which he stood for. Within hours that man of holiness and evil would send his minions to arrest Jesus. Yet the entire transaction could lead only to the final end of that high priesthood in the sight of God. At the trial of Jesus, Caiaphas rent his garment-Qnd thereby signified more than he knew.
5. Clearly, with these Biblical alternatives, there is little room for the un-Biblical idea of a supernatural Devil, who never was and never will be “prince of this world.”

“Lifted up”

Though Jesus drew comfort and strength from contemplation of the great redeeming work appointed for him to do, just now his mind dwelt more on the ordeal before him. Only through suffering could the victory be won: “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” There was designed double meaning in these words, (as also in Jn.2 :19; 3 :3; 4 :10; 11:50). The interpretative passages from Isaiah quoted in the ensuing verses speak of Christ’s glory. “I saw the Lord high and lifted up” (Is.6 :1). “Behold, my Servant shall cause to understand (Heb.), and shall be lifted up, and shall be glorified exceedingly” (52 :13 LXX). And similarly Daniel 7, very much in the mind of Jesus at this time, speaks of the exaltation of the Son of man in the presence of the Ancient of Days.

Even so, John’s own comment is: “This he said, signifying by what manner of death he should die.” And the words were evidently understood in this way by the multitude: “We have heard out of the Law that the Messiah abideth for ever (Ps.72 :17; 110 :4; ls.9 :7; Ez.37 :25; Dan.7 :14): and how sayest thou, The Son of man must be lifted up? who is this Son of man?” Evidently, the expression “lifted up” was currently used colloquially for “crucified.” Similarly another word anaireo (literally: lift up, take up) is often used in the NT. to mean “kill, slay.” Early in his ministry Jesus had used the same idiom: “And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up” (Jn.3 :14; cp. 8 :28; Ezra 6 :11RV). To the minds of the people nothing could be more incongruous than the idea of a crucified Messiah. So this saying of Jesus would contribute to a further cooling of enthusiasm regarding his claims.

Any who leaned towards discipleship would also be greatly discouraged by Jesus’ expectation that he would “draw all men unto him.” Of course, he did not mean “all without exception,” but “all without distinction,” without any regard as to whether they were Pharisees or publicans, Jews or Gentiles, slaves or free, (as in Jn.5 :28; 3 :15,16; Acts 2 :21; 10:43; 1 Tim 2 :6; Rom.5 :18; Heb.2 :9). The exclusive national pride which possessed nearly all Jewry never took kindly to the idea of others being received by God on equal terms with themselves. Thus, with many, enthusiasm for the man of Galilee cooled to lukewarmness and even to indifference. There had been other recent discouragements: his failure to make use of a splendid opportunity at the Triumphal Entry, and his explicit sanction of payment of tribute to Caesar (Mk. 11 :11; 12:17).

Nevertheless Jesus spoke truth. His cross would, and did, draw all kinds of men unto him. The crucifixion itself was to illustrate this, for then not only disciples but also malefactors and women and Roman soldiers and honourable counsellors all paid their tribute to the One who was “lifted up.” “So shall he sprinkle (and purify) many nations”, wrote the prophet of the Lord (ls.52 :15). And, encouraging the Gentile enquirers, Jesus had pointedly said: “If any man serve me, let him follow me.”

Light, darkness

Sensing the Jewish reaction against his doctrine, Jesus exhorted them to use well their present opportunity: “Yet a little while is the light among you. Walk as ye have the light, lest darkness seize you.” It is possible that here he was comparing himself to the Shekinah Glory of God which guided and protected Israel in the wilderness. The pillar of fire and cloud had given light by night to Israel, but was darkness to the Egyptians who sought to seize them (Ex.14 :20). In the wilderness Israel’s unwillingness to be guided by the Glory of the Lord resulted in years of aimless wandering. They walked in darkness for thirty-eight years, of which there is no record. (Note the great gap in the history at Num.20:1; 33 :36).

With all the earnestness he could command Jesus urged his hearers not to fall after the same example of unbelief. “While ye have the light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light.”

And with that he put point to his appeal by acting the parable: “he departed, and did hide himself from them.” The “hiding of God’s face” from Israel is one of the most powerful figures of speech used by the Old Testament prophets (e.g. ls.8 :17). Almost every example of it goes back to the vision of the Cherubim of Glory covering their faces with their wings (Is.6 :2). Now, even more pointedly, Jesus tried to teach the people of their present danger because of indifference to himself and his message. But their minds were made up.

Notes: Jn.l 2:20-36

20.	The Gk. text indicates a definite link with the preceding passage: “The world is gone after him.” They had meant the Jewish world, but now the reader is encouraged to see a yet wider meaning in the phrase.
21.	See Jesus. It was Philip who said: “Come and see” (1 :46); but he meant, and this means, more than see him optically: 15:24; 14:7, 9; 9:37; 6:36.
22.	The Gk. text here shows distinct signs of compression. The usual Gk. particles are omitted; and “he saith to Andrew” and “they say to Jesus” both lack apodosis.
27.	Now is my soul troubled. The suggested historical setting is not certain, for it is the first of the “Korah” psalms, and all the rest of that set seem to belong definitely to the time of Hezekiah. Much in the psalm is appropriate to Hezekiah’s experience.
28.	Glorify. First occurrence in Ex.15 (5 times) and “glory” (twice).
30.	Spake to him. Gk. perfect tense seems to imply that the voice went on speaking, even as the people speculated.
31.	This world. In John’s gospel /cosmos not infrequently = the Jewish world: e.g. 7 :4,7; 12 :19; 18 :20.
32.	Draw all men; s.w. 21 :11. Is there a designed allusion here to the name of Moses?
33.	Signifying; i.e. expressing by sign or type; 3 :14.
34.	The Law; here put by metonymy for the entire O.T.
	Who is this Son of man? From these words it looks as though these Jews understood Jesus to be making outright claim to be the Messiah.
35.	Light. . . darkness. For this combination of light and the fruitfulness of a corn of wheat, compare Ps. 97:11; 67:1,2,6.
36.	Children of light; 1 Th.5 :5; Eph.5 :8; Lk. 16:8.

Thus far Jesus had not spoken specifically about the destruction of the temple, which was his disciples’ immediate concern. But now, having warned them of the interim opposition and persecution which lay in store for themselves, he foretold “fearful sights, and great signs from heaven” (Lk.21 :11).

Just before the siege of Jerusalem, and during it, a series of very remarkable happenings took place. Night after night, for a considerable period, a drawn sword hung over the city. It was actually Halley’s comet making one of its infrequent appearances. One night a quite unnatural bright light shone round the altar and the temple for about half an hour. A heifer, about to be sacrificed, calved in the temple court; this was regarded by the Jews as an omen of very serious consequence. One night, at midnight, the great east gate of the temple, said to require the efforts of twenty men to open it, came open of its own accord. An eerie vision of chariots and horsemen was seen in the sky at sunset. And a citizen of Jerusalem went about ceaselessly crying: “Woe, woe to Jerusalem.” Portents in plenty, but no repentance! Portents also of a different sort!—the synagogue reading on the day the siege began was Leviticus26!

The abomination of desolation

Next, Jesus gave explicit details how Jerusalem would come to ruin: “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place … then let them which be in Judaea flee to the mountains.”

Well might the Lord interpolate here: “whoso readeth, let him understand,” for the details of Daniel 9:26, 27 (and 12 :11) are by no means easy of elucidation. The suggestion that “whoso readeth” has reference to the public leading of Scripture in synagogue or Christian assembly, may be set aside, for clearly it would be of crucial importance that all should understand, and not the reader only.

At this point Luke’s version is explicitly interpretative: “When ye shall see Jerusalem (the holy place) compassed with armies, then (now that the desolation thereof is nigh.” A common Old Testament usage of the word “abomination” is with reference to abhorrent pagan practices. Jesus, therefore, was foretelling how Jerusalem would be invested by Roman armies, with the idolatrous symbols of the different legions flaunted against the holy city. In the siege of A.D.70, the main Roman camp was on the Mount of Olives, which was also known as Har M’shichah, the Mount of Anointing (almost: Mount of the Messiah).

In a way which must have seemed then outside the bounds of possibility, the Jews themselves provided another fulfilment of Christ’s prophecy. Before and during the siege of the city, the deadly rivalries of the three Jewish factions struggling for supremacy brought such defilement of the sanctuary as would never have been considered possible. Thus Jeremiah’s denunciation of his contemporaries found yet another fulfilment: “Because of the evil of your doings, and because of the abominations which ye have committed; therefore is your land a desolation and an astonishment, and a curse, without an inhabitant, as at this day” (44:22).

Daniel’s “seventy weeks” prophecy is explicit, that after the cutting off of Messiah the Prince (though how soon after is not specified) “the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof (Mt.24:14) shall be with a flood., (cp. Is.8 :7,8), and unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined . . . and upon the pinnacle (LXX: temple) of abominations shall . come one that maketh desolate (your house is left j you unto you desolate; Mt.23 .-38), even unto the consummation (is this 1 Th.2 :16?), and that determined, shall wrath be poured out, upon the desolated” (Dan.9 :26,27]. These final phrases do not lack obscurity. They seem to reach forward to the Last Days.

“Flee to the mountains”

On the face of it the warning of Jesus must have appeared to verge on lunacy: “Then (when Jerusalem is being compassed with armies)… let them which are in the midst of her (Jerusalem) depart out.” What sense would there be in this? Would not such fugitives walk straight into the hostile lines of the besieging forces?

The detailed history left by Josephus tells how, in the earliest days of the war, the Roman army (commanded at that time by Cestius) had not only begun the siege but had the capture of the city within its grasp, when—for no known reason—the order was given to withdraw (B.J.2.19.6,7) so that the Jews not only had a breathing space but were actually able to take the offensive for a while. Again, on a later occasion, when the more intense phase of the siege was in progress, for several days Titus relaxed the rigour of the military operations (B.J.5.9.1).

Eusebius, the fourth century church historian, tells how “the people of the church in Jerusalem were commanded to leave and dwell in a city of Peraea called Pella in accordance with a certain oracle which was uttered before the war to the approved men there by way of revelation.” The “oracle” referrred to may have been this part of the Olivet prophecy, but if the detailed character of this allusion may be depended on, it would seem that the warning by Christ was later supplemented by some further revelation through the Holy Spirit. It is to be noted that Pella was the nearest city in the jurisdiction of the Herod Agrippa before whom Paul bore witness. There was no other region within reach where those fleeing Christians could better hope to be hospitably received.

A tale of horror

By contrast, large numbers did the very opposite to what Jesus counselled his disciples. Deeming Jerusalem to be well stocked with food and impregnable, many fled before the advancing Roman armies to the shelter of its fortification, so that the city was hopelessly overcrowded. Josephus’ estimate of 1,100,000 slain, and 100,000 removed as slaves is a palpable exaggeration. The figure given by Tacitus is 600,000, and even this is not easy to reconcile with the known dimensions of ancient Jerusalem. None the less, the mortality was enormous.

The compassion of Jesus welled up in him as he contemplated the horror and suffering which the siege and destruction of the city would involve for multitudes of harmless women and infants: “Woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days.” The aged too would feel the frightfulness of that disaster. Endurance would be taxed beyond the limit. “Pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath.” Their prayers were heard. The crises in the war, when refugees pathetically sought shelter from the savagery and rapine of the struggle, were in October 67, when the war began, and in the Spring of 70. The reference here was not to the weekly sabbath (for what people fleeing frantically for their lives would stop to observe the sabbath day anyway?), but to the sabbath year when food was hard to come by. It is known that the last sabbath year to be observed was A.D. 68-69, a period when most of the Land was relatively quiet.

However, once the siege of Jerusalem began in earnest, in April 70, the sufferings of the people steadily intensified. The factions of the Jews inside the city fought each other with such bitterness and ferocity that much of the considerable store of food was destroyed. Then pestilence added its horrors to those of famine, so that the privations endured by the survivors intensifed to a degree past imagination. Well might Jesus say to those who lamented his own sorry case as he went to crucifixion: “Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me; but weep for yourselves, and for your children” (Lk.23 :28). For all who would form a clear idea of who! sufferings came on the Jews in this melancholy time, Books 5 and 6 in Josephus’ Wars of the Jews are compulsory reading. The story unfolded there fills out in horrifying fashion the truth of the Lord’s prophecy of “great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be,” Unconsciously (?) Josephus’ record echoes these very words: “The destruction which then took place exceeded the destructions that either man or God ever brought into the world.” In another place he offers the explanation: “These things happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus that is called the Christ. For the Jews slew him although he was a very just man.”

“Wrath upon this people’—the Greek word is not that which describes explosive indignation, but rather a deliberate sustained hostility. Yet even in such wrath God remembered mercy, for Jesus was able to give assurance beforehand: “And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect’s sake (i.e. because the Christians everywhere were praying on behalf of the city of their faith) … he hath shortened the days,” The Bible has other examples of the same thing, The three days’ pestilence pronounced by the prophet of the Lord after David’s numbering of the people apparently became one day only (2 Sam.24:15,16-Hebrew text and LXX), because “the Lord repented him of the evil.” The time Jesus lay in the tomb was the shortest possible time appropriate to the Hebrew idiom: “three days and nights.”

So also with the siege of Jerusalem. The city was fortified and provisioned to withstand a siege of great length. Yet, by contrast with the year-long siege before Nebuchadnezzar captured it, it fell to the Romans in five months— April 14 to September 8. The irony of the situation was that, humanly speaking this shortening of Israel’s travail was brought about largely through the folly and wickedness of those besieged.

Thus Jews “fell by the edge of the sword” in long bloodthirsty slaughter, and were “led away captive into all nations,” in fulfilment of many an ominous divine warning through the prophets. “And the Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth to the other. . . and among these nations thou shalt find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest…” (Dt.28:63-67 – a terrible passage to read, much more to experience; see also 1Kgs. 8:46).

Days of vengeance

Jesus himself saw this crisis in precisely this light: “These be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.” Hosea 9 : 7 LXX has this sombre phrase exactly, in a prophecy of unrelenting hostility (see Study 223). And Micah 7 :4, another tremendously powerful Messianic prophecy, comes very close to it. Israel’s cup of iniquity was filled to overflowing (Mt. 23 :32); and so also was the fulfilment of God’s prophecies of judgment.

In one short trenchant phrase Jesus intimated the ruthless casting away of Israel from their high status before God: “There shall be great distress in the Land, and wrath upon this people.” This is the language of estrangement. At the time of the sin of the golden calf God said to Moses: “I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people.” (Ex.32 :9). And in Isaiah, heaven’s reprobation of Israel begins with the words: “Go, and tell this people …” (ls.6:9)

So inexorable was God’s abandonment of the holy House that, even though Titus was resolved on saving such a wonder of architecture for the glory of Rome and the benefit of posterity, it was utterly consumed by fire. The only thing left to do was to complete the desolation. Not one stone was left upon another. It is not unlikely (though the history has no word of this) that earthquake contributed to the final desolation of the scene (Lk. 21:11?).

From this time on, “the transgression of desolation gave both the sanctuary and the host (the tribes of Israel) to be trodden underfoot” (Dan.8 :13), for this is the meaning of the ancient name Jebus. Jerusalem was “trodden down of the Gentiles.”

Isaiah’s parable of the vineyard had told the terrible tale centuries beforehand: “I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be burnt up; and I will break down the fence thereof, and it shall be trodden down: and I will lay it waste . . . there shall come up briars and thorns” (ls.5:5,6).

In a certain sense also, the “times of the Gentiles” were now begun: “blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in” (Rom.11 :25). “Until”-this is the key word. Then the times of Israel will be without end (Ps.81 :13-15).

The Last Days

There is, however, good reason to believe that in the true sense of the term “the times of the Gentiles,” far from being concluded with the Jewish re-possession of Jerusalem in 1967, have not yet begun!

To make this clear it is necessary first to give attention to the sequence of indications that Jesus intended a further and more complete fulfilment of this part of his prophecy in the last days. The evidence is impressive:

1. The most explicit of Daniel’s “abomination of desolation” passages (12 :11) clearly belongs to “the time of the end” (12 :9), even though the reference to “the daily sacrifice” calls for explanation (below).
2. “Let him that is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house…” (Mt.24 :17,18) repeats words which Jesus had earlier used about his second coming (Lk.l7:31).
3. “Great tribulation such as was not since the beginning of the world (the Jewish kosmos?) to this time, no, nor ever shall be.” Yet four other prophecies use similar language about the last days (Jer.30 :7; Dan.12 :1; JI.2 :2; Rev.16 :18). Then how to explain “no, nor ever shall be”? How can there be two times of unparalleled tribulation? Here is another problem that has never been given sufficient serious attention.
4. “These be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.” Yet nothing is more plain than the teaching of the prophets that in the last days there is to be another loss of Jerusalem and a scattering of the Israeli Jews (Zech.14 :2; |f Dt.28 :68; ls.19 :18,20). Does not this ‘ suggest a yet more grim fulfilment of the words of Jesus?
5. “Flee into the mountains” echoes the angelic imperative to Lot (Gen.19 :17). “As it was in the days of Lot, so shall it be… ”
6. “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles,” commonly given a facile reference to the long period from the first to the twentieth century, is actually a quotation from Zechariah 12 :3 LXX, where the context calls for a very different reference. Would anyone apply that prophecy to any but the last days?
7. There is also the unexpected set of parallels between this part of the Olivet Prophecy and Zechariah 14. The Lord was surely making designed allusions to that earlier prophecy:

	Lk. 21.		Zechariah 14
20.	Jerusalem compassed with armies.	2.	All nations against Jerusalem to battle.
20.	The desolation therof is nigh.	2.	The city shall be taken.
21.	Let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains.	5.	Ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains.
22.	Great distress in the land.	2.	Houses rifled, women ravished.
24.	Led away captive into all nations.	2.	Half the city shall go forth into captivity.
24.	Jerusalem trodden down by the Gentiles.	12:3	LXX Jerusalem a stone trodden down by the Gentiles.

The problems presented by this assemblage of details are readily resolved by a simple readjustment in one’s approach:

Jesus was addressing himself essentially to the question: “What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the age?” So the undeniable appropriateness of this part of the prophecy to the tragic Jewish War of A.D.67-70 is to be seen as an eloquent foreshadowing of a much greater crisis still to come. (The difficulty that lies behind this easy reference of parts of the Olivet Prophecy to two different epochs is dealt with at length in “Revelation”, by H.A.W., in the chapters on Seals and Trumpets, and also in the Appendix).

It is now possible to give attention to a more Biblical reading of “the times of the Gentiles” than that familiar phrase has had hitherto.

In paragraph 6 (above) attention was drawn to the link with Zechariah 12:3. There the down-treading of Jerusalem unquestionably has reference to the last days, when “all the Gentiles of the Land are gathered together against it.” Then it surely follows that the same is necessarily true of “the times of the Gentiles.” Two other familiar phrases in Daniel encourage such a reading: “A time, times, and an half… when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people” (12 :7); and “the abomination that maketh desolate” (12 :11) quoted by Jesus in the present context—”whoso readeth, let him understand,” so obviously alluding to 12 :10, settles that the abomination Jesus had in mind was that in 12 :11.

No attempt to put a year for a day is of any value at all here, for Jewish exclusion from the Holy Land lasted much longer than 1260 years. The only alternative seems to be to take the expression as literally as possible (and this is surely a virtue in itself). From this point of view, Jerusalem is due for a Gentile down-treading of 3’/z years in a time, yet future, when Israel experiences its final travail.

This much-neglected approach to one of the most vivid paragraphs in the Olivet Prophecy may help to re-capture some of the urgency of the Lord’s message to those who look for his second coming.

Notes: Lk. 21 :2 0-2 4

20.	Armies. This plural is strictly accurate, for, very willingly, the neighbouring puppet kings supplied considerable contingents to co-operate with the Roman legions.
21.	To the mountains, which have limestone caves galore, useful as refuges.
22.	Vengeance; s.w. LXX Dt. 18:19; Mic. 7:4.
23.	Great distress Cp. Zech l:15 LXX.
24.	Fall by the edge of the sword. A repeat of Jer.20:4.
	Trodden down; Is.63:18; 5:5; 18:2, 7; 22:5, and especially Dan. 8:13. A retribution for Is. l :12.
	The times of the Gentiles: Ez. 30:3; and note the repetition in Dan. 12:1.