With the advent of Advent on Sunday, we make the move in the lectionary from Year C to Year A. So, after journeying through Luke all year, this Sunday’s gospel reading comes from Matthew, Matt 24.36–44. (For video discussion of this passage, see here, also linked below.)
This short section of text contains some important ideas and images, but we cannot make sense of them without locating it within the broader context of Jesus’ teaching in these two chapters (24 and 25).
Our passage starts with a decisive contrast: ‘But concerning that day…’ (Greek: Περὶ δὲ), so the question is, what is this passage a contrast to? The chapter began with Jesus’ disciples admiring the temple buildings, and Jesus in reply predicting its downfall. This in turn provokes further questions from them; though the parallel account in Mark 13.4 has the disciples ask a single, composite question about when all these things would happen, in Matthew (possibly written after the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70), they ask the question in two distinct parts:
Tell us, when will these things be,
and
what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age? (Matt 24.3)
The first half of the question relates to the judgement of Jerusalem and the fall of the temple; but the second half relates to Jesus’ parousia, his return at the end of this age. We need to note here that the Greek term parousia actually means ‘royal presence’, as one or two recent translations render it; it does not contain the idea of motion so much as the result of that motion, the royal figure in question having journeyed to be present with his subjects. By contrast, the early phrase ‘the coming of the Son of Man’ contains the participle erchomenos from the verb erchomai, to come or to go, and is drawn from Dan 7.13. The preceding part of this chapter, up to verse 35, answers the first question; after his teaching about signs, wars and rumours of wars, and the darkening of the sun and moon, Jesus is absolutely emphatic:
Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away. (Matt 24.34–35).
All the things mentioned up to v 35 will happen in the lifetime of the disciples; for detailed exploration of this, see my article on the first part of Matthew 24. The phrase ‘But concerning…’ now focusses our attention on the second half of the disciples’ question: when will Jesus return, can we know when that will be, and how can we be prepared for it?
Jesus has referred to ‘that day’ throughout the gospel, as far back as Matt 7.22, where it refers to the final coming of the kingdom of God. Jesus also refers to it as ‘the day of judgement’ (Matt 10.15, 11.22, 24 and 12.36), and in the later parable of the sheep and the goats in Matt 25.31 onwards, we learn that the ‘Son of Man’ becomes the king of the kingdom of God and the judge who exercises the judgement of God.
The high Christology that this assumes is expressed in the following phrase about knowledge of when that day will come: no person knows, nor even the angels (who surely know heavenly secrets hidden from mortals) nor even the Son [of God], but only the Father. Alongside this high Christology is an admission by Jesus of his own ignorance and limited knowledge, something that early copyists of Matthew clearly found embarrassing, since a number of early manuscripts lack the phrase ‘nor the Son’. But this limitation is surely just part of Jesus ’emptying of himself’ that Paul describes in Phil 2.7, and the equality with and subordination to the Father finds similar expressing in the contrasting claims of John 10.30 (‘I and the Father are one’) and John 14.28 (‘The Father is greater than I’).
The lack of any warning, so that people are taken unawares, is a striking contrast to what Jesus has said about the destruction of Jerusalem in the previous section, when he urges his disciples to take note of all the signs just as they would meteorological indicators of the coming weather. But there will be no warning signs for the return of Jesus—something he has already made clear, as a contrast, in the comment in Matt 24.27 that his parousia (in contrast to the Son of Man coming to the throne of the Almighty, Matt 24.30) will be both visible to all and without warning, just as lightning is.
The comparison with the ‘days of Noah’ contains a simple logical structure which, because of assumptions we make about the passage, it is easy to miss.
- In the days of Noah, most people were unaware of the coming judgement, and were pre-occupied with the mundane realities of life, as if these were all that mattered.
- When the flood came, they were taken away, whilst Noah and has family, having taken notice of God and made ready, remained behind in the ark and stayed to repopulate the earth.
- In the same way, people will be pre-occupied with the mundane realities of life, as if these were all that mattered, but when Jesus returns they will be swept away in judgement.
- Those who follow the teaching of Jesus and have made ready will be left behind to receive and live in the coming kingdom, the New Jerusalem which will come from heaven to earth (Rev 21).
The logic of this is quite clear: in the days of Noah, it was the wicked facing judgement who were swept away, and the righteous who were left. In the same way it will be those absorbed with this life who will be swept away, whilst those who are ready for Jesus will be left behind.
Therefore I want to be left behind, and you should too.
(There is some basis for thinking that this might be the other way around, in that the verb ‘taken away’, paralambano, is a ‘divine passive’, so that in another context it could have the sense of being taken to God. But the parallel with the days of Noah makes it clear that this is not the case here.)
(It is also worth noting that the same kind of logic is at work in the final chapters of Revelation: the wicked are taken away to the burning lake of sulfur, whilst the followers of the lamb, the people of God who are the bride of Christ, remain to inhabit the holy city.)
The final pericope (short section of teaching) in this passage includes a threefold emphasis that we cannot know when Jesus will return, and cannot work it out: ‘you do not know…if he had known…an hour you do not expect’. The metaphor of ‘keeping watch’ (literally ‘stay awake’) cannot mean looking for signs, or keeping a ‘End Times’ countdown, or spending time speculating, for three reasons.
First, Jesus is emphatic that there will be no signs to look out for—the earlier signs all relate to the fall of Jerusalem. Secondly, in the previous verses, both those taken away and those who remain have been engaged in the same routine activities; ordinary life continues even as we live in expectation. Luther was rumoured to have said ‘If I knew Jesus was coming tomorrow, I would still plant an apple tree and collect the rent’. Thirdly, in the parable of the ten virgins in the next chapter, both groups do in fact fall asleep, and are woken in surprise when the bridegroom finally arrives. The difference is that one group is prepared, whilst the other is not.
The image of the thief in the night clearly made an impact in the early Christian community, with the phrase recurring in Luke 12.39, 1 Thess 5.2, 4, 2 Peter 3.10, Rev 3.3 and 16.15, and even the Gospel of Thomas 21 and 103. The corresponding virtue of ‘staying awake’ or alert, (Gk gregoreo, giving rise to the very Christian name ‘Gregory’) also comes in the gospels, Acts 20.31, Paul (1 Cor 16.13, Col 4.2, 1 Thess 5.6, 10), in Peter (1 Peter 5.8) and Revelation (Rev 3.2 and 16.15). This final reference gives as the best insight into what alertness means, since it is paired with ‘keeping [your] clothes on’; clothing is a consistent metaphor for the life of discipleship, lived in holiness and good deeds following the example of Jesus and empowered by the Spirit. As Dick France comments (in his NICNT commentary), readiness is an ethical rather than an intellectual quality. Being ready for Jesus means faithfully living the life he has called us to, something that will be expounded in the following parable of the servants and master.
Being ready for the return of Jesus therefore encourages us to live the life of a disciple, rather than engaging in ‘end times speculation’, in line with the rest of Jesus’ teaching and what we find in the rest of the New Testament. In practice, most Christians in history have met their Lord and judge at the end of their earthly lives, so the promise of Jesus’ coming has always had existential rather than chronological significance. But this sense of hope and expectation should shape all of our life and our prayer, as we petition God our Father that ‘your name be hallowed, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven…’
To learn more about this issue, and locate it in the wider context of what the New Testament says about the end of the world, read my Grove booklet Kingdom, Hope, and the End of the World here.
The picture of two men in a field of wheat ready for harvest seemed particularly appropriate. Jesus uses the language of harvest both about those entering the kingdom now as they come to faith, for example in Matt 9.37 and parallels, as does Paul in Rom 1.13 and 1 Cor 9.10, and for the final judgement, for example in Matt 13.30. This latter image is also found in Rev 14.15.
For the video discussion of this issues, with James and Ian, watch here (there is no video discussion of the epistle this week):
Buy me a Coffee
Jesus gives the signs that precede the Second Coming, so it will not be a total surprise. It will be that for nonbelievers. And the pre-Tribulation Rapture will not be one of those signs.
What signs?
Matthew 24:4-8 disasters increase
Matthew 24:9-14 rising persecution, and many quit the church
Matthew 24:15-28 rise of a dictator
Matthew 24:29-31 the skies darken
The sign … Mt 24:29-30
29 “Immediately after the distress of those days
“‘the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light;
the stars will fall from the sky,
and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.’
30 “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.
Perhaps the ‘the sign of the Son of Man’ will be Lamb appearing on Mt Zion in Revelation (Rev 14:1-5) – before he appears on the cloud Rev 14:14. ‘In heaven’ is perhaps a sign in the outer reaches of heaven (i.e. the sky).
I’ve always thought the “sign” was the cross “lifted up”. It is still drawing all as it’s in the “heavens” where it disrupts all the powers of the heavens brining them down.
Thanks guys – great
James – another ‘funny’ of mine for you…
Q: Why do the dead in Christ rise first?
A: Because they have 6 feet further to go!
Tell me, if Jesus is going to return at a moment of time in history does that not mean that for some of us it will be night time but for other it will be day time?
I guess some thieves ‘visit’ while we are out and not while we are asleep?
Actually 1 Thess 4:16 is clear that Anglicans will reach heaven before anyone else..
“Why you should want to be ‘left behind’ in Matthew 24?!
” The logic of this is quite clear: in the days of Noah, it was the wicked facing judgement who were swept away, and the righteous who were left. In the same way it will be those absorbed with this life who will be swept away, whilst those who are ready for Jesus will be left behind.
Therefore, I want to be left behind, and you should too “.
For me this theory is too simplistic and far from “logical”
In many Christian writings it is a rare bird that doesn’t seem to fly, somewhat like a turkey perhaps.
But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. Therefore encourage one another with these words.
Thessalonians 4:13-18 (ESV):
“ When you think about it, the people who were “taken” were really the ones in the ark who were lifted away from the earth, while the ones who were pulled into the water were left behind to their fate. The connection between the wicked and the taken turns mostly on the English translation rather than directly in the Greek.
The logical order seems to be: 1. Gather together the weeds into bundles. 2. Gather the wheat into the barn. 3. Burn the weeds. To burn the weeds before gathering the wheat into the barn would jeopardize the wheat. It must therefore be taken away first. –
Isaiah 66:15-16 “For behold, the Lord will come in fire, and his chariots like the whirlwind, to render his anger in fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire. 16For by fire will the Lord enter into judgment, and by his sword, with all flesh; and those slain by the Lord shall be many.
When taken with other “end of the age” scriptures from both the Old Testament and the New Testament we get a clearer picture. But I must say that we won’t understand it all until after it’s over. Much like the disciples during Jesus’ first coming. They understood vaguely what Jesus was saying about his death, burial, and resurrection. It didn’t come together for them until after it all happened. The reality is that it doesn’t matter how much someone tells you about something you’ve never seen, it’s not crystal clear until you actually witness it for yourself.
See hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/268/who-is-being-taken-in-matthew-2440-41 Shalom.
Leven is a metaphor both good and bad, why not take “left behind” to be another ambiguous metaphor.? Especially as, like you say, when it happens nobody will be scoring points.
So much of the ministry of Jesus (and of us, his followers,) is about bringing the Kingdom of God to Earth; therefore, it seems a bit perverse if the culmination of that kingdom’s establishment is to whisk its subjects away. Why have a New Heaven and a New Earth if the latter is uninhabited?
Also, why have verse 39 if it’s the saved who will be “swept” away? The meaning of that verse seems clear to me (*pace* your interpretation).
I still appreciate your well-argued comment, though; and your final phrase overrules all our conjecture: “it’s not crystal clear until you actually witness it for yourself”.
The New Heaven and New Earth will contain the New Jerusalem (the Bride of Christ, the slain Lamb). Her garments are the righteous deeds of the faithful (19:8). The endurance required of the faithful will become the adornment of the New Jerusalem, as promised to the congregation in Philadelphia: ‘If you conquer, I will make you a pillar in the temple of my God; you will never go out of (…) the New Jerusalem’ (3:12). So the faithful will exist in the New Order.
P.S. I had to look up what *pace* meant (I am familiar with *contra*) so it took me a while to realise David Sherman was being ironic – I think??
If one is to reference Noah and his days at all,
perhaps we should consider, not our personal circumstances,
but the wider implications of those two days referenced by Jesus.
Noah “walked with God” perhaps cognisant of Enoch’s walk with God
and the end times.
How many such people do we know who “walk with God”
He was a “preacher of righteousness” and the judgement to come;
How often do we hear preached “Flee from the wrath to come” etc.
Or perhaps on Luke 13:23-28 And someone said to him, “Lord, will those who are saved be few?” And he said to them, “Strive to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. When once the master of the house has risen and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,’ then he will answer you, ‘I do not know where you come from.’ Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our streets.’ But he will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know where you come from. Depart from me, all you workers of evil!’ In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God but you yourselves cast out. (ESV)
Perhaps more important than jots and tittles.
Ian, want to hold to your view that there is a sharp change of subject at v36, as it’s the only way I have ever been able make sense of this chapter, without resorting to Schveitzers conviction that Jesus was erroneously expecting to return within his own lifetime. However the vocabulary used doesnt at first sight seem to offer quite as clear support as suggested
a) As ‘parousia’ appears in the section of Jesus reply preceeding v 36 (v27, which on this interpretation seems tohave to be about the parousia into heaven from Dan 7) and
b) ‘erch(etai)’, s used repeatedly in the concluding parable of v45-51, which this interpretaion wants to see giving advice to the beliver in regard to the 2nd coming, and not in regard to the fall of Jerusalem
Or have I misunderstood the case you are making?
Im not sure about b), but in a) Jesus was comparing how some false Christs may appear, very ordinarily, with His return which will be sudden, obvious and everyone will know about it, in contrast to having to go find Him per the false ones. Parousia here then rightly refers to His return in judgement.
I am studying this text to preach this advent. Very clearly the people that are taken away are those being judged and the righteous are left behind. There is zero clear teaching about the rapture in scripture. Most of that theology comes from the 19th century and won’t go away. The return is not for us to know. There may be signs, but our focus is not to be on them. Christ will come no matter what we do. The book of revelation is more than likely about the fall of Rome more than anything. It was written to a particular audience in a particular time. We also need to take Paul’s comments with context as well. He wrote everything BEFORE the destruction of Jerusalem.
The ‘left behind’, whether NOT gathered as ‘the elect’ or NOT ‘taken’ (in Matthew 24) or NOT gathered in the grain harvest (Rev 14:16), will face the crushing of the grape harvest in Revelation (14:20) – which probably corresponds to the Great Battle (Rev 19:20-21). Personally, I do not want to be left behind to face the crushing/ battle.
I suggest the gathering of the grapes in the grape harvest (Rev 14:17-18) could possibly be the ‘taking’ counterpart (not all grapes are crushed in a grape harvest, some ‘first fruits’ are collected for the table) before the ones in the wine-press are crushed. This would represent the mercy of God towards the last-minute repenters, at the last possible moment, and it explains why there are the two forms of extraction – which are quite separate in Matthew.
P.S. If you are interested, I have compared Revelation with Mt.24/ Lk. 17/ Lk. 21/ MK. 13 on my website. https://revelationmacrostructure.com/towards-6-gospels/
This highlights the separation of these chapters into two parts, which correspond to Rome’s power and (immediately before the Parousia) Babylon’s – hedonstic society’s – equivalent influence.
Hi Ian, I hope you’re well. I missed you at ETS in Boston. With all respect with this article, I believe you have ignored the particulars of the text. Please consider my exegesis here, Ian.
https://www.alankurschner.com/2022/05/19/no-you-do-not-want-to-be-left-behind-and-here-is-why/
Hi Everyone,
I just came across another verse that seems to recommend being “left behind.”
“Those who are left in Zion, who remain in Jerusalem, will be called holy, all who are recorded among the living in Jerusalem.” Isaiah 4:3 NIV