Observations On Matthew 24:29-31, And The Parallel Passages In Mark And Luke, With Remarks On The Double Sense Of Scripture -- By: M. Stuart
Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 009:35 (Jul 1852)
Article: Observations On Matthew 24:29-31, And The Parallel Passages In Mark And Luke, With Remarks On The Double Sense Of Scripture
Author: M. Stuart
BSac 9:35 (July 1852) p. 449
Observations On Matthew 24:29-31, And The Parallel Passages In Mark And Luke, With Remarks On The Double Sense Of Scripture
“We have now gone through with the minute examination of the whole passage under consideration. We have seen that, first of all, a literal sense, as insisted on is impossible; in some cases even palpable absurdities would follow from it. In the second place we have seen, that all the phraseology here employed, is applicable, and is actually applied, to political, civil and natural changes and overturns. Most of it is applied to events even far less consequential and significant, than the destruction of the Jewish capital and commonwealth; and this, not in one or two instances merely, but in many passages of the Old Testament. Of course, the allegation that the destruction of Jerusalem is immeasurably, yea infinitely, below the magnitude of an event to which such language as is now before us must necessarily be applied, has no foundation in the usage of Scripture. The simple answer to the allegation is, that fact shows it to be incorrect \ for it is a fact that such language is actually applied by the sacred writers to the describing of events inferior in importance to the final catastrophe of the Jewish nation. The proofs of this, ample ones, have already been laid before the reader. The way is perfectly open,
BSac 9:35 (July 1852) p. 450
then, for the application of the passage to the destruction of Jerusalem, so far as the diction and style are concerned.
Here comes up, now, the question: What says the context and the course of thought? We have also made inquiry in part, as to what answer is to be given to this question. The discourse was prompted by no inquiries about the general judgment. Jerusalem was the only theme which prompted it. The coming of Christ to punish the Jews and the end of the Jewish αἰών, are questions intimately connected with the main one. The whole course of thought is such as relates only to the generation living at and immediately after the death of Christ. The first part, vs. 4–28, terminates with the invasion of Jerusalem by the army with eagle-ensigns. The destruction itself is yet to come. The eagles are gathered around the corse, but they have not yet devoured it. Then follows the devouring. Emblems of this are drawn from the darkening and fall of the heavenly bodies; from terrific appearances in the air; and from the bitter lamentations and agitating terrors that ensue. The coming of the Son of man, with his mighty host in splendid array, closes the scene. The particulars of what is consequential upon his coming, are not told. Every reader must spontaneously know, ...
Click here to subscribe