Journal: Journal of Dispensational Theology
Volume: JODT 18:53 (Spring 2014)
Article: Hermeneutical Keys To The Olivet Discourse Part 2: Lukan Eschatology (Luke 21)
Author: Ray M. Wenger

JODT 18:53 (Spring 2014) p. 49

Hermeneutical Keys To The Olivet Discourse
Part 2: Lukan Eschatology (Luke 21)

Ray M. Wenger

* Ray M. Wenger, Th.M., itinerant Bible teacher, Pinnacle, North Carolina

Throughout the years there have been many debates regarding the meaning of the Olivet Discourse, wherein Jesus described in detail the events of the future. Since the Matthean account is longer than the corresponding material in Mark and Luke, much of the work has been focused upon Matthew.

Significant Debates Regarding Meaning

One of the issues debated is whether the church will experience the Tribulation.1 Posttribulationist Robert Gundry2 asserted that Jewish Christians are in view in Matthew 24–25. Bruce Ware critiqued his work, and demonstrated that it is possible that some of the details of Matthew 24:4–28 could refer to Christian Jews, but that Gundry has not proven that it must be so. In addition, Ware demonstrated that some of the elements in those verses could not be appropriately applied to Christians.3

Another debate is focused upon the Rapture. Some pretribulationists insist that the Rapture is not mentioned in Matthew 24.4

JODT 18:53 (Spring 2014) p. 50

John F. Hart, however, who is also a pretribulationalist, proposed in a three-article series that the Rapture is referenced in Matthew 24.5 A discussion of various evangelical treatments of Matthew 24:1–41 is found in an article by David Turner,6 which Neil Nelson referenced and summarized the complexities of the various views. In the following quote, Nelson included footnotes listing proponents of each view, and the variety in their formulations (which would be helpful to consult for introductory reference to the vast amount of material addressing the subject).7

Turner helpfully divided approaches of evangelical interpreters into four classifications based on how much of the discourse they assign to the AD 70 fall of Jerusalem and the Temple, and how much they assign to the end of the age. Preterist or historical interpreters believe You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe