21:5
We now come to a lovely apocalyptic passage! This discourse is found in Matthew 24 and Mark 13. Interpretation of these passages always causes controversy and I am bound to offend someone. However, in the interests of clarity I will say exactly where I am coming from. One approach to this passage (and many of these comments apply to Revelation as well) is the preterist or partial-preterist approach. This interprets these passages as being fulfilled almost entirely by the events of AD66-70 and the fall of Jerusalem. Now many of the events related here (and in Revelation) find at least a partial fulfilment in first century events, and to have a good understanding of these passages it is important to appreciate the historical background. So there is much to be gained from looking at the events of AD66-70, but to then view them only in that context is a serious mistake. The Jewish view of history was that many judgement events contained common themes, that God acts in a consistent manner. So in the events of AD66-70 we can learn much, but it in no way precludes a future greater fulfilment of the events. In 2 Peter and Jude we find Peter and Jude looking back to judgement events in the Old Testament, and seeing these as indicators of future judgement.
So, if we look at this passage as purely future we will miss much of its meaning, and probably have several flights of fancy. If we look at it purely as fulfilled in the past we will find ourselves having to squeeze several square pegs into round holes. The sensible approach is to look at both aspects. In these terms, Matthew and Mark tend to focus slightly more on the future fulfilment, and Luke more on the 1st century fulfillment. As a rough guide, in Luke 5-24 are concerned with pretty immediate fulfilment, and 25-38 with future fulfillment.
And while I am revealing my position, I might also add that I consider pre-tribulation rapture stuff to be complete nonsense.
21:5,6
At the time the temple was in the middle of an eighty three year building programme! Interestingly, it continued until AD63-4, a few years later it would be utterly destroyed. So, while the building amy have looked impressive, as the disciples thought, it was not long for this earth. Historians Josephus and Tacitus describe the splendour of the temple, so it was not just a case of the disciples being easily impressed, the temple was truly magnificent. Jesus prediction was completely correct.
Is Luke writing about near-future events, and Matthew about far-future events? I think not. Both are writing about the end of the temple that then stood, the second temple. The sign of Luke is "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies" and the sign of Matthew is "this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened". There will be no third or fourth temples. The second temple must go and that is the end of the age.
ReplyDelete