|
Are Matthew 24 and Luke
21 the same teaching? Scholars have disagreed about this for
years, but I’m not one to buy everything the scholars sell.
While I would be a fool to not listen to their wisdom and
intelligence, I strongly believe that I — and we — do not need
anyone to explain the Bible to us. With diligence and the
Spirit, scripture can be understood and God’s plan can be known.
Even
though Matthew 24 and Luke 21 contain strong similarities, I
contend that the bulk of these two sections of scripture are
different teachings given at separate times. Both passages teach
of the future return of Christ, but I believe the “tribulation”
described in Matthew 24:9-22 is the period of time where the
abomination of desolation will stand in the holy place at the
midpoint of the yet-to-happen 70th Week of Daniel.
The “persecution” described in Luke 21:12-24 speaks of the
historical attack on Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple
in 70 A.D. Continue and see if the following evidence is enough
persuade you.
The
Location Change
Both
Matthew and Luke show that Jesus and His disciples are at the
temple when the disciples point out the beauty of it. Both
Matthew and Luke also make it clear that they are still at the
temple when Jesus says, “Do you not see all these things? Truly
I say to you, not one stone here will be left upon another,
which will not be torn down (Matt. 24:2).”
But this
is where an important change takes place between these two
accounts. Matthew 24:3 tells us that later on, after leaving the
temple, the disciples came to Jesus privately and asked Him the
million dollar question, while they were on the Mount of
Olives.
As He was
sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him
privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and
what will be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age
(Matt. 24:3)?”
In Luke 21:7, there is absolutely no mention of a
location change as there is in Matthew. The transition between
verse 6 and 7 is smooth and seems to indicate that the
conversation is still taking place in the temple when the
disciples ask “when.”
“As for
these things which you are now looking at (the temple’s
beautiful stones and votive gifts), the days will come in which
there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be
torn down.”
They
questioned Him, saying, “Teacher, when therefore will these
things happen? And what will be the sign when these things are
about to take place (Luke 21:6-7)?”
Not only
this, but at the conclusion of this teaching, we’re given
another hint.
Now
during the day He was teaching in the temple,
but at evening He would go out and spend the night on the mount
that is called Olivet. And all the people would get up early in
the morning to come to Him in the temple to listen to Him (Luke
21:37-38).
Imagine
Luke informing us in the beginning of his writing that Jesus was
on the Mount of Olives, delivering His teaching. Now visualize
Luke, at the end of his report, saying, “Now during the day He
was teaching in the temple, but at evening, He would go out and
spend the night on the mount that is called Olivet.” It just
wouldn’t make sense. He would have said it in the reverse. “Now
during the evening, He was teaching on the mount called Olivet,
but He would spend His days in the temple.”
But as we know, Luke did not indicate that Jesus
was on the Mount of Olives as Matthew did. And Matthew did not
include the statement Luke made concerning what Jesus
traditionally did during the day.
We have verification that it was a tradition for
Jesus to spend the night on the Mount of Olives, for Luke tells
us this a little later, during his account concerning the night
of Jesus’ betrayal by Judas.
And He
came out and proceeded
as was
His custom
to the Mount of Olives, and the disciples also followed Him.
(Luke 22:39)
John also
shows us that this daytime/nighttime system is the way Jesus
operated.
Everyone
went to his home. But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. Early
in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people
were coming to Him; and He sat down and began to teach them.
(John 7:53—8:2)
I believe
that, in the daytime, Jesus taught publicly at the temple about
what would soon take place in 70 AD. (Luke 21). Later that
evening, on the Mount of Olives, He privately informed His
disciples about the end of the age (Matthew 24).
Let’s
continue to weigh the evidence.
Before or
After What, When?
After
Christ baits them with His comments about the temple’s
destruction, the disciples ask the obvious question: “Teacher,
when therefore will these things happen? And what will be the
sign when these things are about to take place (Luke 21:7)?”
Both
Matthew and Luke now give us Jesus’ exact same response about
the birth pains in reply to their question. He said that many
will come in His name, claiming to be the Christ, and will
mislead many. He taught that there will be wars and rumors of
wars. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against
kingdom, and there will be great earthquakes, and in various
places plagues and famines.
There can
be no mistake about it. The birth pains mentioned in Matthew and
Luke are one and the same.
But all
these things are merely the beginning of birth pangs.
Then
they will deliver you to tribulation, and will kill you, and you
will be hated by all nations because of My name. (Matt. 24:8-9)
Notice
that, in Matthew, Jesus says that there will be birth pains and
then
they will
be delivered up to tribulation, death, and hatred. But what does
Luke say?
But
before all these things,
they will lay their hands on you and will persecute you,
delivering you to the synagogues and prisons, bringing you
before kings and governors for My name's sake. (Luke 21:12).
…will put
some of you to death and you will be hated by all. (v. 16-17)
What
“things” are Jesus talking about when He says, “But before all
these things?” They could be nothing other than the birth pains
He mentioned in the previous verse (including the “terrors and
great signs form heaven,” which we will get to later).
In
Matthew, Jesus clearly taught that the birth pains would take
place first and “then” they would be delivered up to
tribulation, hated, and killed. But, in Luke, Jesus tells them
that “before all these things” (the same birth pangs mentioned
in Matthew 24), they would be persecuted, hated, and killed.
Matthew 24
= Birth pains and then tribulation/hated/killed
Luke 21 =
Persecution/hated/killed and then birth pains
There is
no possible way that a particular event could take place before
and after the birth pains, and therefore it’s impossible that
these two accounts are speaking of the same event. There’s only
one answer that smoothly harmonizes this dilemma.
In Luke,
Jesus speaks to His disciples at the temple during the day and
answers their question about when the temple will be destroyed.
In verses 12-23, He informs them of the details of the upcoming
event that were to take place
before
the birth pains. We now know this event happened in 70 AD when
the Romans attacked Jerusalem, destroyed the temple, and
dispersed the Jews among the nations.
Matthew 24
verses 3 through the end of the chapter records what Jesus spoke
to the disciples later that evening on the Mount of Olives,
answering their question that pertained to His coming and the
end of the age. He taught them about what would take place
after
the birth pains—the final persecution of the elect initiated by
the “abomination of desolation which was spoken of through
Daniel the prophet.”
It fits
together quite nicely. The disciples and other listeners had
heard earlier that day about the destruction of the temple and
about some of the events of the end (Luke). The disciples had
thought about it the rest of the day, piquing their curiosity,
and later that evening they came to Him privately and asked,
“When will these things happen, and what will be the sign of
Your coming, and of the end of the age (Matthew)?”
It
appears, in Matthew, as though the disciples assumed the
destruction of Jerusalem and the temple were linked to His
coming and the end of the age, but there should be no doubt—Jesus
implied no such thing. He simply answered the portion of their
question pertaining to the end. He gave them what they really
wanted to know at that time.
In the
next column, I’ll deal with some of the objections to this view.
Go to Part 2
For more writing from Dave
Bussard, see his blog at http://thepre-wrathtribune.blogspot.com/.
Recommended reading on the rapture debate |