An Interpretation of Matthew 24-25 (Part 20)
Dr. Thomas Ice
"Whereverthe corpse is, there the vultures will gather. But immediately after the tribulation of those days thesun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars willfall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken." -Matthew 24:28-29
Afterspeaking of the suddeness and public visibility of His return in verses 26-27,our Lord now adds a parabolic idiom in verse 28. He says, "Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures willgather." This phrase is also foundin a similar context in Luke 17:24. What does this mean and to whom does it refer? However, before that question is answered I want to make afinal point concerning verse 27.
Global, Not Local
Wehave seen in verse 27, which says, "For just as the lightning comes from theeast, and flashes even to the west, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be,"that it emphasizes a global coming. This verse is set in contrast to the false teachers of verse 26 who saythat the Messiah has appeared locally; in a back room somewhere. We have seen that preterists like GaryDeMar and Kenneth Gentry taught that Jesus came locally, through the Roman armyin a.d. 70. That view contracts verse 27 whichteaches that the Messiah's return will be global in nature. Randolph Yeager says of verse 27,
Thus we have Jesus' reason for telling us not to believe thefalse teachers who will seek to localize Messiah's coming. It will be universally observed. No one will find it necessary to goanywhere in order to see Him, any more than it is necessary to move to a bettervantage point in order to see the flash of lightning is conspicuous-somethingimpossible to overlook. Satan, theshinning one fell from heave, with the speed of the lightning-(Lk. 10:18). Christ will come to earth with theuniversality of the lightning.[1]
Wesee that the teaching of this passage means that second coming of Christ willbe something that no human being-not even the anti-Christ-will be able to fakeit. It will be of such a naturethat only God will be able to pull it off. It will be a global and miraculous event that does not inany way parallel the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in a.d. 70. Thiswill be an event that will not need to be reported in the news media, since Godwill accomplish this event in such a way that everyone will know what hashappened. Thus, it must be a future event to our own day since nothing likethis has yet to occur in history.
The Meaning of the Parable
Thereare two main interpretations of this passage. One holds that it speaks of judgment of the unsaved. The other view sees a continuation ofthe theme of the context denoting suddeness and universality. I believe that both ideas are intendedin verse 28.
OurLord speaks of a "corpse," coupled with the expression of "eagles" or morepreciously in this context "vultures." This provides a picture of judgment. Thomas Figart notes:
Taken literally, it means that wherever dead bodies are, therethe aetoi (either eagles or vultures)will descend upon them. From aphysical point of view, the vast carnage will result in this very thing. Symbolically, it can be related to theparallel passage in Luke 17:37 when the disciples asked "Where, Lord" in regard to the separation of the believers fromthe unbelievers at that time. Heanswered, "Wherever the body is, there will the eagles (aetoi) begathered together." This means that these two similarstatements refer to the judgment to come upon the unbelievers who are notprepared to meet Him.[2]
Inaddition to a judgment warning in conjunction with the return of Jesus toearth, the grammar appears to require an emphasis upon the global suddeness ofthe event. Heinrich Meyer pointsthis out as follows:
Confirmation of the truth that the advent will announce itspresence everywhere, and that from the point of view of the retributivepunishment which the coming One will be called upon everywhere to execute. The emphasis of this figurative adageis on hopou ean and eke: "Wherever the carcase may happen to be, there will the eaglesbe gathered together,"-on no spot where there is a carcase will this fatheringfail, so that, when the Messiah shall have come, He will reveal Himselfeverywhere in this aspect also (namely, as an avenger).[3]
That this proverb includes a global and suddenessaspect is supported by the preceding context, which I have noted beforeemphasizes Christ's sudden and public return.
Not a Reference to a.d. 70
Preterists,not surprisingly, try to twist and turn this verse into a proverb that supportstheir first century fulfillment assumption. Dr. Kenneth Gentry declares:
This seems to speak of the dreadfuldevastation Rome wreaks upon Israel. The furious soldiers who cruelly ravage the people will destroynational, political Israel. Josephus often mentions the rage of the Roman troops: . . . The imagery is familiar enough to anagrarian people: the ugly, rottingcorpse of an animal blanketed by bickering birds of prey.[4]
Fellow preterist Gary DeMar echoes Dr. Gentry's viewand says,
TheJerusalem of Jesus' day, because of its dead rituals, was a carcass, food forthe scavenging birds, the Roman armies. This is an appropriate description of Jerusalem's acts of abomination. In addition, we know that tens ofthousands (Josephus says over a million) were killed during the Romansiege. Even the temple area wasnot spared. The Idumean and Zealotrevolt left thousands slaughtered in and around the temple. . . . There was no life in Jerusalem since theLord had departed. As our HighPriest, Jesus could no longer remain in the city because of itsdefilement. It had to be burnedwith fire for purification.
Justas there is little life left once the vultures have gathered, so with thedestruction of the temple and the desolation of the city, the shadow ofheavenly things is no more.[5]
Ihave already shown from the context that this passage in general refers to afuture return of Christ. If thesurrounding context teaches a future return of Christ, which it does, then thispassage cannot reference a past event. Meyer rightly notes:
Others (Lightfoot, Hammond, Clericus, Wolf, Wetstein) haveerroneously supposed that the carcase alludes to Jerusalem or the Jews, andthat the eagles are intended to denote the Roman legions with their standards(Xen. Anab. I. 10. 12; Plut. Mar. 23). But it is the advent that is in question; while according to vv. 23-27,on hopou ean cannot be taken asreferring to any one particular locality.[6]
Alan M'Neile echoes Meyer's point and declares, "Itdoes not describe . . . the eagles on the Roman standards in the attack onJerusalem; the last is not the subject dealt with either in Mat. or Lk."
Applied to Israel, all is simple. The carcase represents the apostate part of that nation; theeagles, or vultures, are the figure of the judgments that fall upon it. It is not only, then, that there willbe the lightning-like display of Christ in judgment; but the agents of Hiswrath shall know where, and how, to deal with that which is abominable in God'ssight.[8]
After The Tribulation of Those Days
Havingmentioned the second coming of Christ in verses 27-28 in reference to how Hewill appear (i.e., privately or publicly), in this next section (verses 29-31),Jesus describes His return. Thefirst thing Christ says is that His return will take place "immediately afterthe tribulation of those days." This means that the events described in the rest of verses 29-31 willoccur immediately after the events ofthe tribulation. This seemsobvious enough. However, not allseem to understand that.
PreteristGary DeMar says that Christ's coming was a "coming in judgment upon Jerusalemin a.d. 70."[9]If the judgment events uponJerusalem took place in verses 4-28 and occurred before verse 29, as DeMarteaches, then that would mean that he believes that verses 29-31 describe asecond coming, different from the one spoken of in verse 27. This is exactly what preterists must doin order to maintain their twisted view of Christ's prophetic discourse. DeMar admits, "Jesus' 'coming' injudgment upon Jerusalem (Matt. 24:27) and His coming 'up to the Ancient of Days'(Dan. 7:13) were two events that occurred within the time span of the firstgeneration of Christians. There isno future fulfillment of those events."[10] Since DeMar is himself teachingmultiple comings of Christ, it seems inconsistent that he could be so vocalagainst others, like pretribulationists, who also see several comings of our Lord. Yet DeMar heaps great disdain on whathe calls "a two-stage coming."[11]
Kellyrightly observes the following points about this bizarre preterist perspective:
One can hardly be asked to notice the old effort to apply theseverses to the Roman triumph over Jerusalem. On the fact of it, could this be said to be "immediatelyafter the tribulation"? or was it not rather the crowning of Jewish sorrow, notthe glorious reversal of their sufferings by a divine deliverance? Whatever prodigies Josephus reportswere rather during the tribulation he records; whereas the signs spoken ofhere, literal or figurative, are to follow "the tribulation of those day" (i.e., the future crisis of Jerusalem).
Ifthe preterist view should be maintained, it would mean the disciples' questionabout "what will be the sign of your coming?" (verse 3) would have to havemultiple answers. Yet we find nosuch thing in Christ's discourse. Should not the disciples' question read: "what will be the signs of your comings?" It appears that since neither preteristreturn is a bodily, physical return, but instead are spiritual or non-physicalcomings, that one can have Christ coming and going all over the place. One could have Christ coming every dayin some spiritual way, if coming does not refer to an actual physical event. These are the kinds of things that apreterist must do in their attempts to make their system appear to work totheir little circle of followers. JamesMorison notes the following insights:
This word immediatelyhas been a perfect rack of torture to such expositors as have lost their way inthe interpretation of the chapter. . . . The whole difficulty arises from assuming that the tribulation of thosedays has reference to the tribulation that was to be experienced in connectionwith the destruction of Jerusalem. (See vers. 16-21.) There isnot however the slightest necessity for making such an assumption. There is every reason indeed forrejecting it, . . . This greatmistake is founded on an unwarrantably narrow view of the Saviour's aim in Hisdiscourse in general, and on an inappropriately microscopic way of peeringtoward telescopic objects.[13]
Maranatha!
(To BeContinued . . .)
Endnotes
[1] Randolph O. Yeager, The Renaissance NewTestament, 18 Vols. (BowlingGreen, Ken.: Renaissance Press,1978), vol. 3, p. 308.
[2] Thomas O. Figart, The King of The Kingdom ofHeaven: A Commentary of Matthew (Lancaster, PA: Eden Press, 1999), p. 447.
[3] Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Critical andExegetical Handbook to The Gospel of Matthew, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: T.& T. Clark, 1879), vol. 2, p. 144.
[4] Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Perilous Times: A Study in Eschatological Evil (Texarkana, AR: Covenant Media Press, 1999), p. 74.
[5] Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church (Powder Springs, GA: American Vision, 1999), p. 127.
[6] Meyer, Matthew, p. 144.
[7] Alan Hugh M'Neile, The Gospel According to St.Matthew (London: MacMillan, 1915), p. 351.
[8] William Kelly, Lectures on The Gospel ofMatthew (Sunbury, PA: Believers Bookshelf [1868] 1971), pp.493-94.
[9] DeMar, Last Days Madness, p. 71.
[10] DeMar, Last Days Madness, p. 71.
[11] Gary DeMar, End Times Fiction: A Biblical Consideration of The LeftBehind Theology (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001), p. 29.
[12] Kelly, Matthew, p. 494.
[13] James Morison, A Practical Commentary on theGospel According to St. Matthew(London: Hodder and Stoughton,1883), pp. 477-78.