Our last post revealed our complete prophetic model. If you chose suspense over revelation and did not read that post, please know our model now goes by the name inmillennialism. Should you change your mind and want to see the whole system, the link here will lead you to it. If you are new to the blog, you might begin here.
With a futuristic peek at our model now past (pun intended), we are ready to resume our construction project. Jesus foretold the fall of the Temple, prompting the disciples to ask when this would happen and for a sign related to the end of the world (Matthew 24:1–3). Regarding “the end of the world” (i.e., age) see here and here.
We have examined Jesus’ answers to the request for a sign in previous posts. Our X-factor outline shows we are ready to consider his response to the question, “when shall these things be?” (Matthew 24:3).
A. Exhortation: observe!—the Temple will be destroyed (Matthew 24:1–2).
B. When question: what will be the time? (Matthew 24:3a)
C. Sign question: what will be the sign? (Matthew 24:3b)
C.* Sign answer: the signs of associated events, symbols (Matthew 24:4–31)
B.* When answer: this is the time (Matthew 24:32–36)
A.* Exhortation: observe! (Matthew 24:37–25:46); watch! (Matthew 24:42, 43; 25:13)
This post will consider each of the three elements in Jesus’ when response: his stage-setting parable; the time limit he set for the fall of the Temple; and his statement that God had not revealed the specific time for that event. The image above attempts to depict the essence of this response.
A Stage-setting Parable
Jesus began his response to the disciples’ when question with a parable that established the tone for the rest of his answer. He drew an analogy from something with which they were familiar—the fruit-bearing of a fig tree—to emphasize the urgency of their situation (Matthew 24:32–33).
The events of which he had just spoken in his sign response would develop over a period of years. The destruction of the Temple would conclude that series of events. Progress toward that climax, Jesus said, would be like the growth of a fig tree in springtime when the time of its fruit-bearing approaches. As new branches and leaves on a fig tree announce its fruit, so the signs Jesus listed would show that the fall of the Temple was imminent.
In his application of the fig-tree analogy, Jesus emphasized the disciples themselves would observe the consummation of the signs. He said, “When ye shall see all these things” (Matthew 24:33; emphasis added). This lesson pertained to them and their contemporaries, not some future generation.
This personal application to the disciples is a continuation of the pattern Jesus had used throughout the Olivet Discourse. He had addressed his words to them (Matthew 24:2). He warned them against deception (Matthew 24:4). They would hear of wars and suffer affliction, hatred, and death (Matthew 24:6, 9), etc. He used second-person pronouns (you and ye), not third (them, they, etc.), to show he meant the disciples who stood before him, not some other group of men.
Parables teach one primary lesson. This one—serving as the introduction to Jesus’ answer to the when question—emphasizes that the events under consideration would occur soon. Their fulfillment was “at the doors” (Matthew 24:33). The rest of Jesus’ answer to the when question maintains this orientation. Inmillennialism (our proposed prophetic model) accounts for the lesson of this parable.
The Generation Certain
Jesus continued answering the when question by providing a clear time statement regarding the destruction of the Temple: “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Matthew 24:34–35; emphasis added). This assertion conveys certainty regarding the outer limits for when Jesus’ prophecy would come true.
The Greek word translated “generation” (genea) most often means “people living at the same time and belonging to the same reproductive age-class—‘those of the same time, those of the same generation.’ . . . ‘the people of this generation will be punished’ Lk 11:51. The expression ‘the people of this generation’ may also be expressed as ‘the people living now’ or ‘the people of this time.’”1 This word can also mean other things, including “race.”2
Context decides the meaning of a word. Here “it denotes ‘generation’ in the sense of contemporaries.”3 Referring to the use of genea in the Olivet Discourse context, D. A. Carson says “‘this generation’ . . . can only with the greatest difficulty be made to mean anything other than the generation living when Jesus spoke.”4 If this meaning creates difficulties, “the solution should not be sought by understanding ‘this generation’ of the Jewish race or of the human race.”5
The reason for this choice of meanings is clear: the disciples asked a question about time. We should, therefore, understand “generation” in a time-related way. In this context, “generation” (genea) refers to when the Temple would fall, not to the race of people affected by that event.
More evidence in favor of “generation” comes from another conversation Jesus had on the same day6 he gave the Olivet Discourse. Jesus told the scribes and Pharisees that God would require the blood of the prophets of “this generation (genea).” He said to them, “your house is left unto you desolate” (Matthew 23:36, 38). These leaders and their contemporaries would suffer God’s wrath and the Temple would become desolate. “Generation” designated a period of time in both conversations.
Jesus had taught this same time perspective even earlier in his ministry. Less than a year7 before the Olivet Discourse, he told his disciples:
The Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. (Matthew 16:27–28)
Jesus did not use the word “generation” (genea) here, but the time perspective is the same. During that generation, some—perhaps most—of the persons hearing Jesus speak would die, but not all. A few, at least, would live to see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. In the Olivet Discourse, Jesus connected this coming of the Son of Man to the destruction of the Temple (Matthew 24:1–3, 30). His answer to the when question there—it would occur in that “generation”—agrees with this earlier pronouncement.
This time perspective characterized the preaching of the gospel throughout Jesus’ ministry. At its beginning, John the Baptist warned Israel to repent, “for the kingdom of God is at hand” (Matthew 3:2). Fiery judgment would consume those who refused, and the axe was already “laid unto the root of the trees” to prepare for this event (Matthew 3:10).
Jesus repeated this warning. His first message after resisting Satan’s wilderness temptations was “repent: for the kingdom of God is at hand” (Matthew 4:17). He commanded his disciples to go preach “to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 10:6–7). He provided a context for this mission in relation to his future coming: “Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come” (Matthew 10:23).
Jesus’ answer to the disciples’ when question is consistent with the time orientation throughout the Gospels. Inmillennialism accommodates this fact.
Historians show how God fulfilled Jesus’ prophecy. He said his generation would see the fulfillment of “all these things,” meaning all things related to the Temple’s demise. We know from Josephus and other sources the Romans destroyed the Temple in AD 70. This is well within the period Jesus called “this generation.” Roman soldiers did not leave one stone of the Temple upon another (Matthew 24:2). These sources contain many details of how and why these things happened.8 The circumstances required to fulfill this prophecy show Jesus to be that Prophet of whom Moses spoke (John 1:21, 25; 6:14).
This meaning of “generation” confirms (what we called) the “later signs.” The Roman armies committed multiple abominations before making the house of God desolate (Matthew 24:15). They inflicted a 42-month period of “great tribulation” on the Jews (Matthew 24:21). A remnant of the Jews—followers of Jesus—fled Jerusalem and escaped destruction as the Romans legions surrounded the city (Matthew 24:16–17; cp. Luke 21:21). Certain surprising military decisions shortened the duration of the war (Matthew 24:22). Many false prophets contributed to the Jews’ delusion God would deliver them from destruction (Matthew 24:23–26).
That these things happened in that generation is a matter of historical record.9 Some parts of that record are etched in stone, as seen in this picture of the Titus Arch in Rome. This monument shows the Roman general and his men carrying the contents of the Temple to Rome after its fall in AD 70.
Giving “generation” its usual meaning also clarifies Jesus’ use of figurative language in the “immediate signs.” He was not foretelling the end of the physical creation in the distant future. He was not talking about events that would occur at the end of the messianic age which he had just started. The time limit of “this generation” makes these ideas impossible.
It also reinforces the fact Jesus maintained the same subject throughout the Olivet Discourse. He began with a prophecy about the destruction of the Temple. This provoked two questions from the disciples: when would this happen, and what sign would accompany it? Jesus had answered the sign question. Now he provides a definitive statement regarding when these things would occur. He did not introduce another topic. There is no need to assume a dual fulfillment. The destruction of the Temple remained the single subject from beginning to end.
Jesus had not finished his answer, however. He made another statement regarding the when question. Our model must accommodate it, too.
The Day and Hour Uncertain
Jesus’ answer to the disciples’ when question also contained an element of time uncertainty: “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only” (Matthew 24:36).
The tension between knowing the outer limits for when, but not the precise time—the day and hour—produced a sense of urgency for the disciples. Their experience would resemble Noah’s: he knew the flood would come in his lifetime, yet not the precise moment (Matthew 24:37–39). He was to focus on building the ark as preparation for the coming deluge without knowing just when it would arrive. This time uncertainty led the men of Noah’s generation—who lacked faith in the prophetic word of God—to ignore the coming judgment.
In like manner, the disciples had to prepare for a coming judgment. They knew it would come in their generation, but not the precise day or hour. Like Noah, many of their contemporaries mocked them when the “soon-coming” parousia of Christ did not materialize for over three decades10 (2 Peter 3:4). We will say more about Jesus’ comparison of the disciples’ situation to that of Noah in our next post (D.V.).
One can know the generation in which something will happen without knowing the day or the hour it will arrive. Jesus distinguished between these two time perspectives when answering the disciples’ when question. He, speaking as a man, did not know the exact time of the destruction of the Temple, but he knew it would be within the generation then living. He commanded his disciples to work as the signs he had described appeared in succession. They must prepare the people of God for the end of the Mosaic age.
Conclusion
God denounces men who misrepresent the timing of his judgments, especially those who refute near-at-hand judgment prophecies. Over five hundred years before Jesus was born in Bethlehem, Ezekiel warned of another judgment against the Temple. This would occur in the prophet’s generation. Speaking to his contemporaries, he told them the days were “at hand” for the first Temple’s destruction; God would judge it “in [their] days” (Ezekiel 12:23–27).
Israel’s false prophets refused to believe this message. They had a different message for the people: “The vision that he [Ezekiel] seeth is for many days to come, and he prophesieth of the times that are far off.” God said the false prophets did “prophesy out of their own hearts” and pronounced severe woes on them (Ezekiel 13:2f). The Temple fell in their generation just as Ezekiel had predicted (2 Chronicles 36:16–19).
Let us learn a lesson from this. When Jesus said, “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled,” let us not distort his word and assert it was for “times that are far off.” Even though Jesus did not provide a precise time for fulfillment—a day or an hour—he did restrict the time of fulfillment to his generation.
Inmillennialism conforms to Jesus’ answer to the disciples when question. It reflects the “this generation” timeframe that would conclude the signs and bring the destruction of the Temple itself.
When Jesus gave the Olivet Discourse, the time God had allotted Israel after the flesh (1 Corinthians 10:18) had almost expired. After AD 70, the clock tracking the time allotted to the Israel of God (Galatians 6:16) continued ticking in the parousia (presence) of Christ during his reign in the Messianic age.
Christ’s reign will end with the resurrection and final judgment. In that hour, some will rise to life and others to damnation (1 Corinthians 15; John 5:28–29). This was not the subject of the Olivet Discourse, however. Jesus answered the disciples’ when question by saying the “hour” for the destruction of the Temple would come in the “generation” of people then alive.
Footnotes
- Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), 119.
- Henry George Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 342.
- Friedrich Büchsel, “Γενεά Κτλ.,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich, and Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964), 663.
- D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol 8, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), 507.
- Geerhardus Vos, “Eschatology, of the New Testament,” ed. James Orr et al., The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (Chicago: The Howard-Severance Company, 1915), 982.
- Tuesday of Passion Week per A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ (New York: Harper, 1922), 169–81.
- Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels, 85, 101.
- Flavius Josephus, The Wars of the Jews, trans. William Whiston (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1974), 6:1–10.
- E.g., Josephus, The Wars of the Jews.
- Second Peter was written “to predominantly Jewish-Christian congregations in Asia Minor c. 61-2” per John A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Pub, 2000), 198.
