Understanding Matthew 24: The Coming of the Son of Man

As I mentioned in a previous article, Christians have a bad habit of placing “gaps” into the text. They do this so the scriptures will say what they need and want it to, rather than allow the text to speak for itself. Many Dispensationalists believe all of Matthew 24 is to be fulfilled in the future, while others believe only verses 1 and 2 pertain to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Other Premillennialists maintain everything up to verse 27 as pertaining to the first century, with everything from verse 27 to the end of the chapter reserved for the future. Some Partial Preterists, such as Sam Frost, maintain that verse 35 is where a gap should be placed, as “heaven and earth” have not passed away yet. Of course, he advocates a covenantal nature to Revelation 21:1. The problems with this position should be apparent.

This brings us to this article's focus, for I will be addressing Matthew 24:27-34. For this study, this will be the final article. Matthew 24:35 carries with it an entire study itself, and will be the topic of a future series of articles.

Without further ado, here is the passage:

27For as lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. 28For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together. 29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not giver her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: 30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. 32Now learn ye a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. 34Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. (Matthew 24:27-34)

At this point, if you've read my previous three articles on Matthew 24, then you should know that Matthew 24 carries only a first century context. Yet, some Premillennialists don't like this, so they force a gap into the text to make this future. However, I'd like to point out verse 29. Notice that it reads, “Immediately after the tribulation of those days...” Which tribulation? The tribulation of verse 21. (I recommend reading my previous article to observe how this was fulfilled in the first century: http://fulfilledfocus.blogspot.com/2013/02/understanding-matthew-24-parallels-part_7.html.)

 Therefore, if the tribulation was in the first century, and the coming of the Son of man was to occur immediately after that tribulation, does this not mean the coming of the Son of man also occurred in the first century? Of course it does. Notice that no gaps were necessary to make the text say this. This is how we interpret the text correctly.

 This, of course, carries implications and stirs up questions. One question may be how Jesus “returned.” If it were a literal, physical “coming,” then where is he now? It's quite obvious that Jesus didn't return physically, which is what leads to the skepticism of the Full Preterist position. I simply challenge you to ask yourselves if you can find scripture in which Jesus or his apostles claim he would return physically. The most popular proof-text for a physical “coming” is:

9And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud receive him out of their sight. 10And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; 11Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. (Acts 1:9-11)

The logic is as follows: 1) Jesus was in a physical body when he ascended; 2) Per verse 11, Jesus will come “in like manner”; 3) This means Jesus will return in a physical body.

 There's a problem with point two, however, which leads to a problem with point three. First of all, how does “in like manner” default to “in exact manner”? Consider that most Christians believe the world will be burned up at the coming of the Lord (2 Peter 3:10). Did this occur when Jesus ascended? Of course not. Thus, if the world did not burn up upon his ascension, and one maintains that it will be burned up when he returns, then one must admit that Jesus' parousia is not in the exact manner of his ascension. And how about the fact that Jesus ascended with a cloud, yet Revelation depicts him on a horse at his parousia (Revelation 19:11)? (The text does use the cloud imagery in other places in regards to the parousia, just as Acts 1:9 depicts. However, this fact is what is vital to understanding the nature of Christ's parousia.)

What I believe we should be focusing on is why Jesus ascended in a cloud. I believe this is vital given the repetition of the cloud imagery in regards to Jesus' parousia, as well as the Old Testament usage pertaining to God's interaction with people. Jesus provides this cloud imagery during his Olivet Discourse:

30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Matthew 24:30)

We find this repeated in Revelation:

7Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. (Revelation 1:7)

He was to come with clouds, which “every eye” would see. Notice that “every eye” is still confined to the first century Jews “which pierced him” (Acts 2:36). We have another cloud reference later in Revelation:

14And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle. (Revelation 14:14)

But what does this imagery represent? For this, we simply need to connect some dots. Notice in Matthew 24 that Jesus says he'd come “with power and great glory” (Matthew 24:30). He spoke of this “glory” earlier on:

27For 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. 28Verily 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 makes two big points here. First, he says he will “come in the glory of his Father...” Also, notice that Jesus said some of the people standing there at that very moment would still be alive at his parousia! Once again, we have, from Jesus' own mouth, proof that his “return” would be in the first century! How else could some of them standing there at that moment still be alive?

Christ coming “in the glory of his Father” was most certainly a declaration of deity, which the Jews thought to be blasphemy, for it entailed that Christ was indeed God. If Christ was to return in the glory of the Father, we must understand this as the Jews would have. Again, the use of clouds is one thing we need to understand. Secondly, when God “came down” in the Old Testament, what did it mean? These points are vital. For this, Psalm 18 is a great place to start:

6And when I was afflicted I called upon the Lord, and cried to my God: he heard my voice out of this holy temple, and my cry shall enter before him, even into his ears. 7Then the earth shook and quaked, and the foundations of the mountains were disturbed, and were shaken, because God was angry with them. 8There went up a smoke in his wrath, and fire burst into a flame at his presence: coals were kindled at it. 9And he bowed the heaven, and came down: and thick darkness was under his feet. 10And he mounted on cherubs and flew: he flew on the wings of winds. 11And he made darkness his secret place: round about him was his tabernacle, even dark water in the clouds of the air. 12At the brightness before him the clouds passed, hail and coals of fire. 13The Lord also thundered from heaven, and the Highest uttered his voice. 14And he sent forth his weapons, and scattered them; and multiplied lightnings, and routed them. 15And the springs of waters appeared, and the foundations of the world were exposed, at thy rebuke, O Lord, at the blasting of the breath of thy wrath. 16He sent from on high and took me, he drew me to himself out of many waters. 17He will deliver me from my mighty enemies, and from them that hate me; for they are stronger than I. 18They prevented me in the day of mine affliction: but the Lord was my stay against them. 19And he brought me out into a wide place: he will deliver me, because he has pleasure in me. (Psalm 18:6-19)

There are a lot of details here, but look again at verse 9, in which we read, “And he bowed the heaven, and came down...” Did God literally descend and defeat David's enemies, or is David giving us a detailed picture of his deliverance? I believe it is without support to suggest that God physically descended from heaven. Do I believe he intervened and delivered David? Without a doubt! But it cannot be supported that God physically descended. Also, upon his supposed descent the earth was shaken and the heavens bowed. He also flew on cherubs. So fierce was his descent that the weather seemed to effect the whole world. However, I argue that this is not without much exaggeration. Details like these are given to proclaim the glory of God, the very same glory Christ was to return in. Thus, when we read Christ was to come in the clouds of heaven, and the sun and moon were to be darkened, and the foundations of the mountains shaken, we are reading of Christ coming in the glory of the Father, in judgment, no less (Matthew 16:27-28; Revelation 20:12-13).

Consider this passage in Exodus:

8And I have come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them out of that land, and to bring them into a good and wide land, into a land flowing with milk and honey, into the place of the Chananites, and the Chettites, and Amorites, and Pherezites, and Gergesites, and Evites, and Jebusites. (Exodus 3:8)

Again, did God literally, physically come down to deliver them? Could it be that this is the way God's intervention is depicted? If God literally, physically came down to deliver them from the Egyptians, then the burden of scriptural proof falls on those making the claim.

In Isaiah 19, we read of the judgment to befall the Egyptians. The very first verse gives us cloud imagery:

1Behold, the Lord sits on a swift cloud, and shall come to Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and their heart shall faint within them. (Isaiah 19:1)

When Christ declared that he would return in the glory of the Father, on the clouds of heaven, he was declaring judgment. Therefore, when we read of Christ returning in like manner of his ascension, I believe our focus should be on the details often overlooked, such as the fact that he was taken up on a cloud. I also believe the New Testament itself stresses the importance of the cloud imagery, which is why it is vital for us to understand what it is supposed to entail. As a result of such connections, we can understand Christ's return in like manner to tell us that his parousia would be one of judgment. If in the Old Testament God “came down” to judge a kingdom or nation, then when Christ “comes down” should we not draw the same conclusion? I firmly believe the Jews did, and they thought of such a thing as blasphemy, because they knew exactly what it implied.

At the coming of the Lord, the sun was to be darkened, and the moon, and even the stars were to fall from the heavens (Matthew 24:29). This imagery is drawn entirely from the Old Testament, in which God would be coming to judge a particular nation or kingdom. Consider how Isaiah uses this same imagery in regards to Babylon's destruction:

9Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it. 10For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. 11And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible. 12I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir. 13Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger. (Isaiah 13:9-13)

Would you like to guess how many of these details actually happened? Search all you might, but the stars did not fail to shine, and the sun did not darken, neither the moon. The heavens also did not shake, nor was the earth removed from her place. All of this imagery is used to depict God's judgment of Babylon in the sixth century B.C. This also happens to be the exact same imagery Jesus uses of himself in regards to his parousia. And what happens at his parousia? Jerusalem is judged and destroyed, just like Babylon! Do you understand the connections now?

This kind of imagery doesn't only appear once or twice, either. Isaiah uses it again:

1Draw near, ye nations; and hearken, ye princes; let the earth hear, and they that are in it; the world, and the people that are therein. 2For the wrath of the Lord is upon all nations, and his anger upon the number of them, to destroy them, and give them up to slaughter. 3And their slain shall be cast forth, and the corpses; and the ill savour shall come up, and the mounts shall be made wet with their blood. 4And all the powers of the heavens shall melt, and the sky shall be rolled up like a scroll: and all the stars shall fall like leaves from a vine, and as leaves fall from a fig-tree. (Isaiah 34:1-5)

In just five short verses we read of immeasurable destruction. The wrath of the Lord was upon all the nations, and he sought to destroy them, for it was the day of the Lord (Isaiah 34:8). Now compare this to Christ's parousia:

10But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons out ye be to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? (2 Peter 3:10-12)

29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: (Matthew 24:29)

All of this imagery depicts judgment. In each instance it is used in the Old Testament it is meant to define the judgment of a nation or kingdom. Therefore, I ask again, what is to suggest that it should be taken any differently in the New Testament? If the world didn't evaporate during the Old Testament judgments of a nation or kingdom, then how could the world be destroyed according to the very same details in the New Testament? It just doesn't make any sense! We need to let scripture interpret scripture, and in this case, nothing supports a physical return of Christ, nor the destruction of the world!

So, if the nature of the coming of the Lord is one in judgment, and Christ is to come in the glory of the Father, what part of his ascension should grab our attention? Remember, Christ was to return in like manner, meaning his ascension represented what the actual parousia would be like! In the Old Testament, did the coming of the Lord ever result in God physically coming to this planet? Not once can a physical descent be verified with scripture. It should be rather obvious that Jesus' parousia is not meant to be understood in the way Futurists interpret the text.

To conclude this study of Matthew 24, we must look at what Jesus called the “parable of the fig tree”:

32Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh: 33So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors. 34Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. (Matthew 24:32-34)

Dispensationalists point to this parable as proof of Israel's return as a nation in 1948 having been prophesied. This is not what the text says, though. Luke's account tells us it was a parable of not only the fig tree, but all trees (Luke 21:29). How can the Dispensationalists argue that this parable represents the re-establishment of the nation of Israel, yet neglect Luke's record of “all trees”? Wouldn't this have an effect on whether this parable represents only the nation of Israel? No doubt about it.

Let me tell you what this parable is saying without using a bunch of imagined references to Israel. Jesus said that the fig tree (and all trees) puts forth leaves as summer approaches. In other words, the sign of summer's imminence is when the trees bring forth leaves. Likewise, when they would see the signs Jesus listed in his discourse, they would know that the coming of the Son of man was near. It's amazingly simple, isn't it? This is all he was trying to say! Jesus ends this parable by reminding his disciples that their generation (not ours) would not pass away before all of those things occurred (compare this to Matthew 16:27-28).

I believe this study has been effective in proving a first century fulfillment of Matthew 24. The context of Matthew 21-23 leaves this fact unquestionable, and it carries over into Matthew 24. The coming of the Son of man, the parousia, would occur upon the temple's destruction. The disciples knew this, and that is why their questions (Matthew 24:3) were asked in response to Jesus' mention of the temple's destruction (Matthew 24:2). We are wise to remember audience, as well. Jesus was speaking to his disciples when he said they would see the abomination of desolation, and they would see false Christs and prophets arise, and they would see the Son of man coming on the clouds with glory. All of this proves a first century fulfillment.

This isn't easy for most Futurists to accept. The belief in a future, physical coming of Jesus Christ at the end of time is so widespread that it is hard for people to accept an alternative. However, as this article has shown, Jesus never said he'd return physically, neither did his apostles. Every connection we made between the Father's “coming” and the Son's “coming” reveals that Christ's parousia would be in judgment of the apostate Jews. This correlates perfectly with how the Father “came down” in times past, and since Jesus was to return in the glory of the Father (Matthew 16:27), the implications are clear!

I hope this study has been a blessing to you, as well as challenging. I always encourage people to test my views for themselves and to present any objections. The purpose of these articles is simply to share my thoughts with you and hope you consider them.

Until next time, stay blessed by the best.

Jason Watt