← Back to sermon library

I'll begin reading in verse 1. 
Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples 
came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said 
to them, Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, 
not one stone shall be left here upon another that shall not be 
thrown down. Now as He sat on the Mount of 
Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, Tell us, 
when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your 
coming, and of the end of the age? And Jesus answered and said 
to them, Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come 
in my name, saying, I am the Christ, and will deceive many. 
And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you 
are not troubled. For all these things must come 
to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against 
nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines, pestilences, 
and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of 
sorrows. Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill 
you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake. 
And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and 
will hate one another. Then many false prophets will 
rise up and deceive many. And because lawlessness will 
abound, the love of many will grow cold. But he who endures 
to the end shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom 
will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations. 
And then the end will come. Therefore, when you see the abomination 
of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the 
holy place, whoever reads, let him understand. Then let those 
who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on 
the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. And 
let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. But 
woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing 
babies in those days. And pray that your flight may 
not be in winter or on the Sabbath. For then there will be great 
tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the 
world until this time. No, nor ever shall be. And unless 
those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved. But for 
the elect's sake, those days will be shortened. Then if anyone 
says to you, look, here is the Christ, or there, do not believe 
it. For false Christs and false prophets 
will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, 
even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand. 
Therefore, if they say to you, look, he is in the desert, do 
not go out. Or, look, he is in the inner 
rooms, do not believe it. For as the lightning comes from 
the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the 
Son of Man be. For wherever the carcass is, 
there the eagles will be gathered together. Immediately after the 
tribulation of those days, the sun will be darkened and the 
moon will not give its light. The stars will fall from heaven 
and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then the sign 
of the Son of Man will appear in heaven. And then all the tribes 
of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man 
coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And 
He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and 
they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from 
one end of heaven to the other. Now learn this parable from the 
fig tree. When its branch has already become 
tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. 
So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is 
near at the doors. Assuredly, I say to you, this 
generation will by no means pass away till all these things take 
place. Heaven and earth will pass away, 
but my words will by no means pass away. Amen. Well, let us 
pray. Father in heaven, we thank you 
for the Word of God. We thank you for our Lord Jesus 
Christ speaking here as the prophet. We ask now that Your Holy Spirit 
would guide us as we consider this section of Scripture. We 
pray that You would cause us to reflect upon these things, 
help us to see in this destruction upon Jerusalem in the first century 
something of a type concerning that great judgment to come when 
Jesus shall come physically at His second coming to judge the 
living and the dead. And as we were exhorted previously, 
may all of us consider the most important thing being the Gospel 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, His life, His death, His resurrection. 
May you indeed, Lord God, cause the Holy Spirit to work in each 
and every heart here, cause us all to be safely found in Christ, 
not having our own righteousness, which is from the law, but that 
which is from you through faith in Christ Jesus. Forgive us now 
for all of our sins and all of our wickedness. Cleanse us in 
the blood of Jesus and cause us to receive with thankful hearts 
your word. And we pray through Christ Jesus 
our Lord. Amen. Well, we have spent several 
weeks in this study of Matthew chapter 24. As I've said before, 
there are three primary ways to view the passage. There is 
that view that is called futurism, that sees the bulk of the prophecy 
occurring, not in the future of the disciples, but in our 
future. There is, secondly, the two events 
theory, whereby persons see in Matthew 24 both the description 
of the judgment to come upon Israel in the first century at 
A.D. 70, but as well the second coming 
of our Lord. And then there is the interpretation 
that I have presented, which is called preterism, which simply 
means past tense. And what we have in Matthew 24 
is a description of those events associated with the fall of Israel 
generally and her temple specifically in A.D. 70, which was indicative 
of the fact that Christ was enthroned at the right hand of the Father 
where He must reign till all of His enemies are made His footstool. 
Now we come this morning to verses 32 to 35. Essentially what we 
have seen beginning in verse 15 is Christ's command to flee 
in verses 15 to 20. Again, superfluous if the end 
of the world is in sight. Why in the world would Jesus 
tell persons that they could actually escape or actually flee 
if it was the second physical coming? The language of verse 
17 or verses 16 and following indicate it was a localized judgment. Let those who are in Judea flee 
to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop 
not go down to take anything out of his house. Let him who 
is in the field not go back to get his clothes. He speaks of 
the difficulties associated with fleeing from the Roman armies, 
those who are pregnant. He's not condemning pregnancy. 
He's not saying pregnancy is bad. But it's certainly a challenge 
when one's trying to flee from armies that are trying to kill 
you. as well those who are nursing babies in those particular days. 
Again, he's not anti-breastfeeding, he's anti, or he's speaking to 
the difficulties involved in trying to flee from a city under 
siege at such times. Then we saw the reason for the 
flight in verses 21 to 22. This is the Great Tribulation. The Great Tribulation is not 
in our future. The Great Tribulation occurred 
in A.D. 70. That's not to suggest there 
won't be tribulation for the people of God. We studied this 
on Wednesday night, Hebrews 13.3. The Apostle tells us to remember 
the prisoners, those who are mistreated. There's always going 
to be suffering associated with the cause of God and truth. But 
when we ask the Bible, what is the Great Tribulation specified 
by Christ in Matthew 24, I think the evidence is overwhelming 
that it was a first century issue. It was a first century phenomena 
wherein Israel was destroyed by Roman armies. He then cautions 
them against false Christs, verses 23 to 28. In times of crisis, 
there will always be one that has the answers. In times of 
crisis, there will always be one that can be counted on. Jesus 
says, don't believe them. In other words, listen to the 
prophet Christ, and when these things start to take place, flee 
from the city. Don't have Bible studies with 
false Christs and false prophets. And then He described the coming 
of the Son of Man in verses 29 to 31. We sought to show that 
this is utilizing the grammar of Old Testament prophecy. The 
idea of sun and moon and stars is language descriptive of the 
fall of kingdoms. We saw several passages highlighting 
or indicating that such was the case. Verses 30 and 31, it's 
a judgment coming by the Son of Man in terms of what's happening 
in Israel in the first century. The language is conspicuous. 
Verse 30, the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven. 
We're looking for a particular sign, but we're looking for it 
in heaven. And the idea is, is that through 
this judgment, through this conflagration that comes upon Jerusalem in 
AD 70, this is indicative that Christ is at the right hand, 
reigning and ruling over all of His enemies. Verse 31 speaks 
to the church age, the gospel going forth, with reference to 
the call of Gentiles to the Lord Jesus as the people of God. So 
that's an overview from verses 15 to 31. Now, notice in verses 
32 to 35. We see two specifics. First, 
we're going to look at the parable of the fig tree in verses 32 
and 33, and then the certainty of the prophecy in verses 34 
and 35. But note first the parable. Jesus 
says in verse 32, now learn this parable from the fig tree. It's 
a command. Remember, they asked for a sign. 
Give us the signs. What will be the signs of your 
coming and of the end of the age? Well, Christ has already 
spoken of one of the signs. The sign that the Son of Man 
is in heaven is what you will see. But here He speaks specifically 
to a helpful thing that would cause them to determine the specifics 
involved. The Lord here describes His coming 
relative to the destruction of Jerusalem and now gives them 
the sign. He says, learn this parable from 
the fig tree. The fig tree is utilized by Hal 
Lindsey. He's a famous, popular author 
concerning eschatology, and Hal Lindsey suggests that what we 
have in verse 32 concerning this fig tree is the rebirth of the 
nation of Israel in 1948. Now, as wonderful as that may 
sound, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever in the context 
that this is the case. It is to take an eschatological 
system and impose it upon the text. There is nothing indicative 
of that thought in this passage. The utter absence of anything 
here to confirm this, notwithstanding is pieced together theology. 
I think that Jesus is using the fig tree here as an analogy. 
But if we had to see a parallel, we might look at Matthew 21, 
specifically verses 18 to 22. There Jesus curses the fig tree, 
and there Jesus says, no fruit will ever grow upon you again. So, if he's using it in that 
sense here, he's essentially telling them that Israel, that 
was represented by this fig tree, its destruction is near, its 
destruction is close. Added to that a verbal allusion, 
at least, to Amos chapter 8, an Old Testament prophet that 
in a vision saw this summer of ripened fruit. A basket, rather, 
of summer fruit. A basket of ripened fruit. And 
in the context, it is to show that Israel herself is ripe for 
judgment. But I don't even think we need 
to go there. I think the idea is simply, learn this parable 
from the fig tree. The fig tree was the most common 
deciduous tree in Israel. Now, most of the times people 
say, he's using big words that I don't understand. Well, deciduous 
isn't a word that theology typically uses. Deciduous is a botany term. It simply means a leaf-bearing 
tree. You see what Jesus is saying? 
He's giving them a sign by which they can know that this judgment 
has come near. The fig tree is the most common 
of leaf-bearing trees. I think the parallel in Luke 
21-29 confirms to us that how Lindsay is wrong. In Luke 21-29, 
Jesus says, look at the fig tree and all the trees. It's not unique 
to a fig that when the summer leave is going, that the summertime 
is near. It's an analogy. It is used by 
Jesus to employ a teaching, a lesson, a piece of instruction to them. 
So He gives this parable and He highlights what it means. 
Verse 32, when its branch has already become tender and puts 
forth leaves, you know that summer is near. Now notice the specific 
lesson in verse 33, so you also. Again, before we move on, we 
ought to appreciate the you also in the context. The you also 
in the context are the disciples who ask specific questions, the 
disciples who occupy the first century, the disciples who are 
there standing before the then standing temple that they've 
already asked concerning its fall, its collapse that Jesus 
has mentioned. So you also, when you see Again, 
language reminiscent of verse 15. To these selfsame disciples 
and apostles, he says, when you see the abomination of desolation. He's talking to a people that 
would be very conspicuous with the particulars involved in this 
particular situation. He says, when you see all these 
things, Now, this is where it gets very interesting because 
as a preterist I read commentary that basically says I'm out to 
lunch when I come to verses 29 to 31. That can't refer to the 
situation in AD 70. Brethren, I took pains to show 
you that it does. I took pains, several sermons, 
and several long sermons, for which I apologize. I typically 
don't like to go past 12.30. I have a mindset and a conviction 
that you don't do that to people. But I knew this date was coming, 
the time was near, and I knew that if I die tomorrow, I wanted 
to get this stuff done before I move on into another world. 
Now, I don't think I'm hopefully going to die tomorrow. Hip surgery 
is not supposed to be fatal. However, There's been a bit of 
a press and a bit of a time constraint upon me, so there have been some 
longish sermons, again, for which I apologize. If you're visiting 
this morning and I go over at 12.30, please don't say, well, 
we'll never come back there again. Know of a truth, we try to keep 
it to 12.30. But brethren, we have sought 
to demonstrate that these things were not pulled out of a hat. 
But persons that say it's nutty to say that 29 to 31 occurred 
are persons who now tell us that all these things mean some of 
these things. You can't have it both ways. 
Either the language means something, or it doesn't. What does Christ 
say specifically in verse 33? So you, disciples, you, plural, 
when you, plural, disciples, and those to whom He's speaking, 
see all these things. What things? The most natural 
reading of all these things is everything up to this point, 
isn't it? Wouldn't it be a natural assumption 
to believe that all these things in verse 33 include all these 
things from verses 15 to 31? That's how I submit is the natural 
reading of the particular passage. The things that they would see 
would indicate that it or he is near. The text is a bit ambiguous. We don't know if it's it or he. 
Either actually fits. The things that they would see 
would indicate that Christ was enthroned at the right hand of 
God as He explained in verses 30 and 31. Again, which parallels 
Daniel 7, 13, and 14. Daniel 7, 13, the Son of Man 
comes to the Ancient of Days. He's not coming from the Ancient 
of Days. He comes to the Ancient of Days 
in His ascension. And then a kingdom and a dominion 
and power is given to Him where He rules and reigns over all 
things. That's verses 13 and 14 in Daniel 7. The things they would see would 
indicate the end of the Jewish age, which would directly answer 
their question in verse 3. Tell us, when will these things 
be? He'll address this from verses 
36 and following. But then they ask a second question. Tell us, when will these things 
be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end 
of the age? I don't think those are two questions. 
I think they in their minds would have associated the sign of His 
coming and the end of the Jewish age with this one particular 
response. Now, in terms of this passage, 
the parallel speaks a volume to it as well. In Luke 21, verse 
31, the Apostle, or Christ, recorded by the Apostle, the Apostle's 
helper, says, when you see these things happening, it's again 
the same parable, the same fig tree, when you see these things 
happening, know that the kingdom of God is near. Know that the 
kingdom of God is near. In other words, this kingdom 
announced by Jesus when he starts his public ministry. What are 
the first recorded words of Christ? Repent. Why? For the kingdom 
of God is at hand. What's the first message of John 
the Baptist? Repent, for the kingdom of God 
is at hand. You see the theological significance that with the coming 
of Jesus Christ, it is first coming, the kingdom of God has 
come near. It is drawn nigh. In other words, 
brethren, we're not waiting for the kingdom of God to be realized. It is realized. It's in operation. Christ, according to John the 
Apostle in Revelation 1, is presently the ruler over the kings of the 
earth. No matter what happens this week 
in terms of the political election cycle in the United States of 
America, if you are enabled to wake up on Wednesday morning, 
Jesus Christ is the ruler over the kings of the earth. Jesus 
Christ is enthroned. The king is in. The Apostle Peter 
says this happened at His resurrection and His ascension. He sat enthroned 
upon David's throne at the right hand of God, according to Acts 
chapter 2. And here Christ is telling them, so you also, when 
you see all these things... Again, I submit the most natural 
understanding of all these things is verses 15 to 31. When you see all these things, 
then know that it is near. at the doors, or as Luke tells 
us, or fleshes it out, the kingdom of God is near. Now, I think 
this has implications for those who believe that there are two 
events in view in Matthew chapter 24. Again, if we disagree at 
the end of all of this, praise God Almighty. If we disagree 
on the person and the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, then one 
of us is a heretic. But if we disagree in terms of 
how we interpret the Olivet Discourse, we can live happily ever after 
and go to heaven. Brethren, I think we need to 
take seriously some of the implications of this particular passage in 
this particular place. This idea that we're dealing 
with both the fall of Israel in AD 70 and the second coming 
of the Lord Jesus. I think in the first place it's 
inconsistent because all these things, as most naturally understood, 
has all these things. As well, it is inconsistent because 
if all these things include the, according to them, second coming 
of our Lord, then looking for a sign is superfluous. Do you 
understand that on the reading of the two events, if we think 
that verses 29 to 31 means the second physical coming of the 
Lord Jesus, Now Jesus says, I want you to have this parable of the 
fig tree to learn this lesson. When you see the Lord Jesus having 
descended upon this earth, know that it is near? It just doesn't 
make sense. Why would we need to know that 
something is near if it's already been actualized or effectualized 
vis-a-vis 29 to 31, meaning the second physical coming of the 
Lord Jesus? Is everybody with me? Do you 
understand how superfluous it is to have a sign, a fig tree 
sign, a lesson, to tell me that something is near if it's already 
happened? It just doesn't make any sense 
as we read through the passage. Now, persons understand that 
tension. Persons really see the difficulty 
involved in this, and so there are a few attempts to try and 
deal with it, to their credit. In the first place, there is 
an attempt to explain that verses 29 to 31 is not included in all 
these things. B.A. Carson makes a valiant attempt 
from verses 15 to 28 to say these are the all these things that 
Jesus is referring to in verse 33. But it can't be 29 to 31 
because that refers to the second physical coming. I call that 
special pleading. I call that unfair. How in the 
world can you determine that verses 29 to 31, because they 
don't fit in your criteria, we're going to just pretend that they're 
not covered by all these things? Imagine if a preterist did that. 
Oh, you can't do that. That's playing unfair with the 
text. It's not right, brethren. Just 
like stuffing ballot boxes is unfair, so is not dealing with 
passages not fair. Either all these things means 
all these things, or it means some of these things. And I don't 
think that the flow of the passage indicates that it is some of 
these things. As well, the attempt by some 
commentators to argue, and this is actual, that the parable is 
out of place. You see, Matthew, when he recorded 
this, he really should have put the parable of the fig tree after 
verse 26. Because you see, it's just not 
in the right place. But brethren, I submit that if 
you have to rearrange the text of Scripture in order to make 
sense of your interpretation, it's time to rearrange your interpretation 
and not move the text of Scripture around. We are not at liberty 
to employ a Microsoft Word hermeneutic. Well, this parable of the fig 
tree and its reference to all these things certainly would 
fit better under verse 26 before this whole coming of the Son 
of Man language is employed. Obviously, if one has to rearrange 
the text to validate an interpretation, it makes suspicious that particular 
interpretation. But they do rightly understand 
the tension, and in that I commend them. If the sign indicates something 
is near, it doesn't make sense that it comes after a description 
of the end. If verses 29 to 31 describe the 
end of all things, whence the sign? Why a sign? Why do I need to look at a deciduous 
tree? Why do I need to consider that 
when it's bearing forth its leaves, the summer is near? Why is it 
that when I look around and see all these things, then I'll know 
that he's near, he's at the door? If he's already present, it's 
just not sensible, or it doesn't make sense. The tension itself 
is not even really addressed in the sense that if it is the 
end of all things, then why a sign at all? Why? Why would we need a sign? Is 
anybody going to be perplexed after the second physical coming 
of the Lord Jesus? Is anybody going to be scratching 
their heads saying, boy, I wonder what's happening here? No, every 
eye will see Him, all the peoples of the land in this context, 
all the peoples of the earth when He comes again in glory 
to judge the living and the dead. You won't be able to escape. 
There's no mountains to flee to. There's no sort of, well, 
is this or not? There's no question whatsoever. But if it's a coming in judgment, 
if it's spiritual in nature, if it's via the Roman armies 
in a historical setting, if it is that way, then a sign makes 
perfect sense, because he wants his people to flee the conflagration. And that simply means the burning 
of the city. He wants them to escape, He wants 
them to live, and He gives them this particular sign so that 
they'll know and they'll be able to run. I think the parable itself 
further confirms or underscores the Preterist interpretation. 
Verses 29 to 31 were not to be understood as a second physical 
coming, but a coming in judgment by the Ascended Lord from the 
right hand of the Father. It just doesn't make sense. I 
think Dumbrell's right, William Dumbrell. Dumbrell, there's an 
R in there, and this dear brother just passed away recently. You 
hear me quote RT France a lot, that brother just passed away 
within the last year. Another man by the name of Alec 
Motier just passed away. These men were in their 90s and 
had served the Lord well. But William J. Dumbrell says, 
the coming is to occur through historical events. For if the 
coming were to take the form of the son of man's visible return, 
the sign of the fig tree would be superfluous. If He's physically 
descended vis-à-vis 29 to 31, whence the fig tree? Why? He says, "...for if the 
coming were to take the form of the Son of Man's visible return, 
the sign of the fig tree would be superfluous. Thus, the judgment 
to be visited upon Jerusalem is a sign that the Son of Man 
is in fact reigning in heaven." That's 7, 13, and 14 Daniel reality. He's come to the ancient of days 
and then authority, kingdom, dominion, and power has been 
given to him. He calls the elect through the 
preaching of the gospel. He brings his foot of judgment 
to bear upon all of his enemies. For he must reign till all of 
his enemies are made his footstool. The first chief enemy of the 
Christian Church was not the Roman Empire. The first chief 
enemy of the Christian Church was unbelieving Israel. Read 
the book of Acts. You will see that fleshed out. 
You will see that demonstrated powerfully, page and again. This is the reality that Christ 
is now enthroned at the right hand of the Father. So that's 
the parable of the fig tree. Notice, secondly, the certainty 
of the prophecy. There's two things we ought to 
observe in verses 34 and 35. First, the prophetic declaration, 
and secondly, the prophetic affirmation. But note, first, the prophetic 
declaration, verse 34. Assuredly, I say to you, this 
generation will by no means pass away till all these things take 
place. One man says, our Lord sums up 
with an affirmation calculated to remove every vestige of doubt 
or uncertainty. Now again, if you're going to 
Microsoft Word it and take 29 and 31 and remove it from under 
all these things, yeah, I guess You can't explain it. But if 
you're going to read the text as it's given, if you're going 
to read the text with the textual indicators involved, you're going 
to see that immediately verse 29 points or comes after the 
tribulation in verses 15 to 28. If you're going to read the text 
as it's penned and not move 29 to 31 out of there, then you 
have to admit that what Christ is saying here had to take place 
in this generation. Notice the truthfulness of his 
prophecy. This is why it's so important 
that we understand this section. Assuredly, I say to you, Christ 
is staking his prophetic integrity on this. What's the mark of a 
true prophet of God? That they're right, you know, 
75% of the time? That they're good, you know, 
98%? No! The mark of the prophet of 
God is that he's right! That he's true! That when, say, 
a Jeremiah, or when a Micah, tells the kings in their age 
that the fall of Jerusalem is going to come, then they better 
make good on their word. Not by blowing up Jerusalem, 
but by having spoken, thus saith the Lord. You see, brethren, 
if Jesus was mistaken here, as Bertrand Russell tells us, if 
Jesus was wrong here, as others assume, well, then it strips 
from us any apologetic usefulness from the passage. But if, as 
we have seen, what Christ says is specifically and exactly applied 
in A.D. 70, why wouldn't the Church use 
that as a means to confirm, affirm, validate, and authenticate the 
revelatory words spoken by Christ? And it's intriguing because Christ 
underscores that he's underscoring his prophetic integrity. How 
does Jeremiah, and how does Ezekiel, and how does Hosea, and how does 
Joel, and how does Amos, and how does Obadiah, and how do 
Jonah underscore their prophecies? Thus says Yahweh. What's Christ saying? Heaven 
and earth will pass away, but my words will by no means pass 
away. The prophet Christ is speaking 
authoritatively from the Mount of Olives, and if there's any 
margin for error, then we've got a prophet that is not consistent. Now note, very specifically, 
the target of his prophecy. Verse 34, Assuredly, I say to 
you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these 
things take place. Again, now, those pesky words, 
all these things, I submit, again, they're most naturally to be 
understood as verses 15 to 31. There's no textual indicator 
that would suggest that 29 to 31 do not fit, therefore move 
them into the future. It's arbitrary. without textual 
basis, without textual argument. The task of exegesis is exegesis. And then we compose our theology, 
and then we compose our eschatology. We don't bring our eschatology 
and our theology to bear upon the text and make it say what 
our theology or eschatology says. We let the text of Scripture 
inform us concerning what it means. Now notice, assuredly 
I say to you, he underscores this, this generation will by 
no means pass away till all these things take place. The reference 
to this generation indicates that the discourse has in view 
first century realities. And therefore, as I've argued 
at length, the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. The lexical 
definition of generation. In other words, what does the 
dictionary say when it comes to the word generation? Well, 
this is probably the most famous of the Greek lexicons, or dictionaries, 
and it defines generation this way. The sum total of those born 
at the same time, expanded to include all those living at a 
given time, generation, or contemporaries. Interestingly enough, bagid is 
what this particular lexicon, now it's called bidag, Same lexicon, 
just been updated and the names of the authors have been switched 
around a little bit, but the same thing. They cite Matthew 
23, 36 and Matthew 24, 34. What does BEDAG say? It says 
that a generation means a generation. It says the sum total of those 
born at the same time. So, if we come to verse 34 and 
we ask the question, who's going to see all of these things that 
Jesus Christ has said? In fact, not only who's going 
to see all these things, but this generation will by no means 
pass away till all these things take place. This generation is 
the people to whom Jesus is speaking. You say, well, that's a great 
lexicon or dictionary. The big question is, how does 
Matthew use this generation? There are several places in his 
gospel that can only mean the people to whom Jesus is speaking. Notice in Matthew 11, verse 16. 
Matthew 11, verse 16. But what shall I like in this 
generation? Who do you think he's talking about? The Jews 
in general? The church, the world at large, 
every human being, no, he's talking about that generation, the people 
with whom he's with. But to what shall I liken this 
generation? It's like children sitting in marketplaces and calling 
to their companions and saying, we played the flute for you and 
you did not dance. We mourned you and you did not lament. In 
other words, we played a wedding game. and we played a funeral 
game. Certainly playing wedding games would be more consistent 
with the way we viewed reality. I don't know that many of our 
children are playing funeral games, but that's what was going 
on in this particular instance. We mourned you and you did not 
lament, for John came neither eating nor drinking, and they 
say he has a demon. The Son of Man came eating and drinking, 
and they say, look, a glutton and a wine-bibber, a friend of 
tax collectors and sinners, but wisdom is justified by her children. 
The reference to John the Baptist and Jesus coming to a generation 
would indicate that it's His contemporaries. Notice in 12, 
Matthew 12. Again, just fleshing out, showing 
you that this generation in Matthew 24, 34 ought to be understood 
as His contemporaries unless there is wonderful exegetical 
reason as to why it's the only time in Matthew's gospel we put 
a spin on it. Notice in Matthew chapter 12, 
verse 39, but an evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign. That's a truism overall, an evil 
and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, but it's in response 
to their saying, teacher, we want to see a sign from you. 
An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign 
will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. He 
goes on to describe his crucifixion, his death and his burial. What 
generation's in view? It's that generation. Notice 
as well, verse 41. The men of Nineveh will rise 
up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it because 
they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and indeed a greater 
than Jonah is here." Again, it's a truism. You think about a nation 
like Nineveh that escaped the wrath and fury and judgment of 
God in that particular context, and then say a Canada or a U.S. that had much gospel light and 
resisted it and rebelled against it and rejected it. Ninevites 
will rise up in the day of judgment and say, you wretches. But in 
this context, he's dealing with himself. A greater than Jonah 
is here. It's his death. It's his resurrection. That's the sign that's going 
to clinch it for everyone. Verse 42, the queen of the south 
will rise up in the judgment with this generation, and condemn 
it. For she came from the ends of 
the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and indeed a greater 
than Solomon is here." See what Christ is saying? He's a greater 
king than Solomon, He's a greater prophet than Jonah, and He's 
a greater priest than the Levitical priesthood. That's earlier in 
Matthew chapter 12. Notice in verse 45, then he goes 
and takes with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, 
and they enter and dwell there, and the last state of that man 
is worse than the first, so shall it also be with what? This wicked 
generation. You see what Matthew's doing? 
He's telling us that Jesus is speaking to his contemporaries. 
Again, unless there's compelling reason why 2434 ought to be understood 
differently, we ought to understand it the same way. That's not all, 
1604. It's not the, you know, the only 
use of this generation in the Bible. Verse 4, chapter 16, a 
wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign 
shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. This 
is absent, but adulterous generation is there, and the sign again 
is the sign of the prophet Jonah. As explained in chapter 12, that's 
when the Son of God goes into the belly of the earth, and He 
comes out on the third day, just like Jonah went into the belly 
of the whale, and He comes out on the third day. Notice in 1717. Then Jesus answered and said, 
O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? 
Again, it's a truism. It's a general maxim that most 
generations are without faith. But he says, how long shall I 
be with you? There's a particular generation involved that Christ 
addresses in this instance. And then most intriguingly, brethren, 
is 2336. I really think that if you get 
your minds wrapped around the larger context, which begins 
in chapter 21, culminates here in chapter 23, and then is prophesied 
over by Jesus in chapter 24, that you won't be mistaken in 
the interpretation of the Olivet Discourse. But note, let's just 
back up, verse 34. Therefore, indeed, I send you 
prophets, wise men and scribes. Some of them you will kill and 
crucify. Some of them you will scourge 
in your synagogues and persecute from city to city. Doesn't the 
book of Acts flesh this out for us? Doesn't the book of Acts 
explain this to us? Isn't this what happens with 
Peter, with James, with John, with Paul? Isn't this what we 
see all over the book of Acts? And then note Christ's condemnation 
in verse 35, that on you may come all the righteous blood 
shed on the earth from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood 
of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the 
temple and the altar. Verse 36, there's that prophetic 
amen once again, assuredly, assuredly I say to you all these things. 
Why would all these things not mean all the things he just said? Why would all these things mean 
some of these things in verse 36? Well, no one argues that 
it does. Most everyone accepts that all 
these things means the judgment that is to befall these apostate 
people who have filled up the measure of their father's guilt. 
But even more intriguingly, assuredly I say to you, all these things 
will come upon this generation. He laments over Jerusalem that 
kills the prophets and therefore will reap the judgment of God. 
In 24, He departs from the temple, which is not just a geographical 
movement, but parallel to Ezekiel 9-11, where Yahweh departs from 
the temple. It's a departure of the glory 
of God from the temple. In Matthew 1, He is God with 
us. And here, with reference to the 
temple, He is God has departed from this place. And then he 
says in verse 2 that the temple is going to be destroyed. The 
disciples ask the questions in verse 3, and then he answers 
them. and he can't make it any more 
plain or any more clear than the language that he has assumed 
or used in verses 33 and 34. So you also, when you see all 
these things, know that it is near at the doors. Assuredly, 
I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till 
all these things take place. R.T. France makes this observation. He says, it may safely be concluded 
that if it had not been for the embarrassment caused by supposing 
that Jesus was here talking about his second coming, no one would 
have thought of suggesting any other meaning for this generation. 
Hear what he's saying. There's a real life tension in 
the passage if you assume that 29 to 31 means the second physical 
coming. You've got to redefine this generation. You've got to redefine all these 
things. You've got to fit it in your 
eschatology, but unfortunately remove it from its context. He 
says it may be safely concluded that if it had not been for the 
embarrassment caused by supposing that Jesus was here talking about 
his second coming, No one would have thought of suggesting any 
other meaning for this generation, such as the Jewish race, or human 
beings in general, or all the generations of Judaism that reject 
him, or even this kind, meaning scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees. You see, those are all the spins 
that are put on this generation in 2434. But if we look at the 
lexical understanding in Bagot, And we look at Matthew's use 
more importantly in his gospel, there must be compelling evidence, 
there must be compelling textual reasons why 2434 doesn't mean 
this generation. When everywhere else in the gospel, 
it does. Added to that fact that when 
we ask the Bible, what's a generation? It's not like a decade or a century 
where it's tight, 10 years or 100 years. It's general, but 
the generality is about 30 to 40 years. You can go through 
scripture and verify this. And isn't it intriguing that 
a generation later, the Roman armies did surround Jerusalem, 
did destroy the city, and did destroy the temple. That's not 
haphazard. It's not a coinkydink, as the 
Stooges would say. It is rather the prophetic declaration 
of Christ coming to pass. He narrows it for us. He tells 
us all these things and this generation. Now note finally 
the prophetic affirmation in verse 35. Well, actually, this 
is always a good place to quote Gil. Gil says, this is a full 
and clear proof, this statement concerning all these things and 
this generation. This is a full and clear proof 
that not anything that is said before relates to the second 
coming of Christ, the day of judgment, and the end of the 
world. He's saying verses 29 to 31 do not refer to what's 
in our future. Now, this is all the more powerful when you consider 
that John Gill was a premillennialist. I have argued, and I will maintain 
it to my dying day, what you view concerning the interpretation 
of the Olivet Discourse does not necessarily dictate your 
eschatology. He was a premillennialist that 
understood textually the preterism that is conspicuous in Matthew 
24. I submit he was doing good exegesis. He didn't let his eschatology 
or his theology dictate the understanding of specific texts. It was the 
text as understood, and then he would construct his eschatology 
based on a whole lot of things that I don't agree with. I think 
Gil was wrong with reference to premillennialism. He would 
think I was wrong, and that's okay, but it is intriguing that 
a particular eschatological position is not necessary with reference 
to this interpretation. So back to Gil. This is a full 
and clear proof that not anything that is said before relates to 
the second coming of Christ, the day of judgment, and the 
end of the world. But that all belonged to the coming of the 
Son of Man, in the destruction of Jerusalem, and to the end 
of the Jewish state. I could have saved us a lot of 
time, a lot of weeks, and a lot of energy just to read that verse. 
That's the point in all of it. That's the point in the context. No accident. 21, Pastor Cam read 
it. He comes into the temple. By 
what authority do you do these things? He puts them on the horns 
of a dilemma, and that starts a great debate on the Tuesday 
of the Passion Week. Jesus tells three parables that 
have as a focus judgment upon Israel. We get into 22 and there's 
direct confrontation. They come to ask him questions. 
Not because they want to be enlightened, but because they want to trip 
him up and show him to be a charlatan. He finishes that interchange, 
he finishes that section by asking them a question concerning the 
Messiah. Whose son is he? And then in 
chapter 23, he cautions the disciples and the multitudes against the 
religious leaders in Matthew 23, 1 to 12. And then in Matthew 
23, 13, to the section we read in verse 36, he denounces them. He condemns them. Christ would 
have been thrown out of the university setting today because he hurt 
them in their safe spaces. He called them hypocrites. He called them bags of snakes. 
He denounced them for their wickedness and said that this judgment is 
coming upon this generation. He departs from the temple. He 
then sits at Olivet, or on the Mount of Olives, on the Tuesday 
night. He says that all the temple will 
be destroyed, and they say, Well, tell us, when will this be? Tell 
us, what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of 
the Jewish age? And he answers them, He answers 
them straightforwardly. He answers them consistently. 
He answers them using the language of Old Testament prophets. He 
answers them very wonderfully. And this is his point, that when 
you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, know that its desolation 
is near. And when you see all these things, 
know that it is near. At the doors. What's at the doors? What is near? Well, Luke tells 
us the kingdom of God has drawn near. We compare that with Daniel 
7, 13 and 14, an ascension to the Ancient of Days text, where 
he takes his position at the right hand and he's given authority 
and power. This is a manifestation. of that 
authority and power when he rules over his enemies, and he must 
do so till they're all doomed. And then the prophetic affirmation, 
verse 35, he uses a similar convention in the Sermon on the Mount in 
Matthew 5. He says, Heaven and earth will 
pass away, but my words will by no means pass away. The truthfulness 
and the stability of Jesus' words, forever settled is your word, 
O Lord, in the heavens. You see, Christ is establishing, 
and Christ is affirming, and Christ is putting His integrity 
upon this. If I were to say to you, hey, 
it's going to rain today, I'd probably be right, because we're 
in Chilliwack. Someone mentioned before worship, it was Mark Hall, 
he said one of his sons said, yeah, there was 27 days of rain 
in October, and that wasn't a record. That's pretty amazing, isn't 
it? If I go out and make a vague reference to the changing in 
the weather patterns, I could be right and I could not be right. 
If I stood on the steps of Ottawa and said, this nation is going 
to be judged by God Almighty in a generation, and I claim 
to do so in the name of Yahweh of Israel, I did so in the name 
of my Savior, you see the stakes are a little bit more different 
there. I don't think we fully get our minds wrapped around 
the centrality of temple in Jewish theology. It was everything for 
both political and religious life. The Israelites, or the 
Jews, were convinced that as long as the temple was standing, 
that God was happy with them. You see this in the prophets. 
You see this in Ezekiel. You see this departure of Yahweh 
in Ezekiel 8-11. That was the big problem in the 
6th century judgment upon Israel. It wasn't that their city was 
destroyed. It wasn't even that their temple 
was destroyed. It's that Yahweh had withdrawn 
from them. It was an act of judgment. That's what's in view. That's 
what the prophet Christ declares, and he underscores, and he sets 
his own reputation upon it by saying, heaven and earth will 
pass away, but my words will by no means pass away." As I 
mentioned earlier, Jeremiah, the prophets, Ezekiel, Isaiah, 
they all ever say, thus saith Yahweh. I mean, is that why we 
read them? Thus says the Lord, thus says 
the Lord. You can read anybody if they're 
not telling me what the Lord says, but the prophets of Israel, 
we go to them because they're speaking in the name of God. 
Christ says heaven and earth will pass away, but my words 
will by no means pass away. Not only staking his prophetic 
integrity on these words, but he's underscoring his deity. 
He's underscoring that the Son of Man is indeed a divine figure. One like the Son of Man comes 
to the ancient of days. He's like the Son of Man in the 
sense that he does share our humanity. that He has our properties 
and our infirmities, but He's like us because He's unlike us 
too. He is God of God, light from 
light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in being 
with the Father. who for us men and our salvation 
came down from heaven. You see, he's like the Son of 
Man, but he's not exactly like the Son of Man, because he is 
the unique man, the Lord Christ, Son of Man, Son of God. So, in 
conclusion, we see the specific target of the prophecy, the unbelieving 
Jews who had been dealt with in chapters 21 to 23, the unbelieving 
Jews who had rejected the Messiah that was sent to them, the unbelieving 
Jews of the first century who had filled up the measure of 
their father's guilt, 23-32. He is speaking about this generation, 
not 21st, but first. This generation, as we considered 
it, looking at how Matthew uses it throughout, must mean the 
contemporaries, the people with whom Jesus lived and the people 
to whom Jesus spoke. Now, the scope of the prophecy, 
all these things, Christ says. Again, it's arbitrary to take 
29 to 31 out of the mix. I get it, I understand it, and it's 
a noble venture and a noble cause, but it's not done faithfully 
to the text of Scripture. You see, if you assume 29 to 
31 means something, you assume that it can only refer to the 
second physical coming, well, then you've got to deal with 
32 and 33 that shows us this parable of the fig tree, which 
indicates something that allegedly already happened is near, We 
can't have that, so 29 to 31 must not mean that. That's just 
an arbitrary way of going at the text, brethren. The declaration, 
we've already kind of covered this ground. I won't keep going 
through it. But I just want to, and again, I've really tried 
to be irenic in this series of sermons. Irenic means peaceable. 
I respect greatly my brothers with whom I disagree. I mean, 
I love the guys on my shelf that disagree with me. I use them 
profitably. I have told you before, my position 
is the minority. I'm not standing up here saying, 
you know, believe me because I'm right. No, it's hopefully 
believe because this is what the text of scripture says. But 
I respect these guys immensely. And I love them immensely, but 
brethren, it is good for us to try and point out some inconsistencies 
in various positions. In the first place, the futurist. 
The person who sees this prophecy in our future. I mean, just the 
bare bones obvious interpretation, well, what good would it have 
had for them? See, all the Bible is written for us, but it wasn't 
written to us. Right? I mean, we learn lessons 
from Ezekiel and Jeremiah and Isaiah when they talk about the 
destruction of Jerusalem in either 722 BC or 586 BC. Again, this is nothing new. What 
Christ is speaking of here has already happened twice in history. 
But what possible relevance would it have had for them if it was, 
you know, pushed off into our future? They have real questions. Jesus says, well, I'm not going 
to answer your questions. I'm going to give some teaching that 
has nothing to do with you, but it's going to hopefully serve 
somebody in the 21st century. But you see, we're not sure it's 
going to happen in the 21st century either, are we? What if we go 
on to a 22nd, a 23rd, a 24th? What if we get into the year 
3000? It really causes one to reflect upon Jesus' words in 
verse 33, Maybe near doesn't mean for Jesus what near means 
to the rest of us. And I know they go to 2 Peter, 
a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as is to 
the Lord. But if words have meaning, near must mean near. And it certainly 
means that if we understand it in terms of preterism, first 
century context, first century application, within a generation 
it took place. But consider, with reference 
to futurism, I submit there is a failure to consider the larger 
context. If you've been with us, this 
isn't the 10th sermon on the Olivet Discourse. It's however 
many we've had since 21. I knew it was coming in 24, and 
I knew persons would say, what do you mean? How in the world 
could you say that happened? How could you possibly suggest that 
29 to 31 happened? Because it's been happening all 
Tuesday of the Passion Week in Jesus' disputes with the religious 
leaders. It's happened all day for him 
to suggest or submit here. It is nothing new in 24. It's 
the culmination of all that preceded. It's a failure to reckon with 
the declaration of Jesus in Matthew 24 too. Are we to assume a rebuilt 
temple? I know they do that. They assume 
a rebuilt temple, but why? Why do we assume a rebuilt temple 
in a revived Roman Empire? when the original temple and 
the original Roman Empire suffice to explain the passage. As well, 
the failure to understand Jesus' response to the disciples' questions. See, I don't think Jesus was 
giving them prophecies within prophecies, enigmas within enigmas, 
wrapped in a conundrum, surrounded by riddles, dancing little jokes. No, no, he answered. The prophet 
Christ is splendid because he answers his people's questions. 
Don't go to those false Christs that assume they have all the 
answers. No, listen to the prophet Christ. He's not going to steer 
you wrong. As well, the failure to take 
seriously the fulfillment of each thing in the first century. 
Go back to 24-33. So you also, when you see all 
these things, know that it is near at the doors. Verse 34, 
assuredly I say to you, this generation will by no means pass 
away till all these things take place. I should underscore that 
by no means is a double negative. You know what a double negative 
is? That means it's really negative. A double negative in English 
becomes a positive. A double negative in English 
means a positive. It's not not raining. It's not 
not raining. It means it's raining. It's not 
not raining, so therefore it's raining. It's a double negative. 
We don't use that in English because it's a logical inconsistency. But in Greek, a double negative 
means a double negative. It's an umme. Jesus says, it 
will by no means. You can bank on it. You can trust 
your soul upon it. It's not going to happen till 
all these things take place. Notice, surely I say to you, 
this generation will by no means pass away till all these things 
take place. A man whom I respect greatly, but who is a futurist, 
defines it this way. If you have the John MacArthur 
Study Bible, you'll find this on page 1440. He's explaining 
why this generation couldn't have meant that generation. He 
says, this cannot refer to the generation living at that time 
of Christ, for all these things, the abomination of desolation, 
verse 15, the persecutions and judgments, verses 17 to 22, the 
false prophets, 23 to 26, the signs in the heavens, 27 to 29, 
Christ's final return, verse 30, and the gathering of the 
elect, verse 31, did not take place in their lifetime. Brethren, 
that's called begging the question. He doesn't prove this. He doesn't 
demonstrate this. Again, I have taken page. You 
may disagree, and that's okay. But I hope that all of you admit 
that when we worked our way through 15 to 31, I didn't pull rabbits 
out of the hat. I told you at the outset, and 
I think I maintained strict adherence to it, we were going to cite 
Josephus very discriminately. I wasn't going to be a Josephus 
commentator, though if you do want to read Josephus, as Ryle 
says, it's the best commentary on our Lord's words in the Olivet 
Discourse. But we saw that all those things 
were applied. Now, Pastor MacArthur certainly 
hasn't heard these sermons. You can't hold him responsible 
to that. Oh, he didn't deal with the evidence. 
But he had John Gill, he had R.T. France. He can at least 
say that, OK, I see where some persons could get this. This 
is the problem that I have. If you do not imbibe preterism, 
fine, God bless you. Go your way. Be happy, healthy, 
and profitable futurists and to events persons. But preterism 
is being made to look like it's heretical. that it's outlandish, 
it's crazy. One of the commentators suggests 
that to apply 21 to 31 to the judgment upon Jerusalem in A.D. 70 is symptomatic of an ability 
to make the Bible say anything we want. I take offense by that, 
especially from people that tell me that all these things don't 
mean all these things. It means some of these things. 
Especially from people that say, this generation can't mean this 
generation, because none of those things took place. When in the 
interpretation itself, they haven't proved the position. You see, 
it goes both ways. If you're not going to put up, 
you've got to shut up. And you can't just beg the question. 
The failure to define this generation exegetically instead of theologically. It's theology, brethren, and 
eschatology. It's a mindset that we bring 
to the text, in my not-so-humble estimation. With reference to 
the two-event view, I think it's an arbitrary shift between A.D. 
70 and the Second Coming. And I think it's an arbitrary 
shift dependent on eschatology or theology, and not the text 
itself. And I don't think they do this, 
and this is not the case whatsoever, but a simple reading, a natural 
reading of the text indicates that we don't need to depend 
on the ingenuity of the interpreter. I really hope you don't leave 
here saying, wow, I could never see what he's just explained. 
Read it. All these things means all these 
things and this generation means this generation. It's arbitrary. Shift between the 80, 70 and 
second coming. As well, I think there is a failure 
to understand Jesus in light of the grammar of prophecy utilized 
by the Old Testament prophets. Again, Doug Payne, 29 to 31. 
Love to have a quiz, an exam. How much did you actually pay 
attention? 29 is not language unique to all of that. Sun, moon 
and stars is language that the prophets used consistently to 
speak of the fall of kingdoms. The coming of the Son of Man 
in clouds, in judgment. Yahweh comes in judgment to Egypt 
riding on a cloud in Isaiah 19. The language of Daniel 7, 13, 
and 14 is so obviously alluded to by our Lord in verse 30 that 
it's amazing that we miss it. It's amazing that we stumble 
over it. And then 31, messengers, not 
angels in terms of disembodied spirit beings that strum harps 
and live on clouds. The word angel has two connotations. It means them, but it means humans. John the Baptist was a messenger. 
The angels in the seven churches in Asia Minor in Revelation 2 
and 3, they're most likely pastors, bishops, overseers, those who 
would get the letter from John and read it to the churches as 
well. There is a failure to adequately 
explain the function of the parable of the fig tree. Now again, they'll 
do it by excluding verses 29 to 31 from all things, but that's 
just not fair to me. It's like moving the goalposts. 
It's just arbitrary. And I know they'll say the same 
about me. That's fine. We can love each 
other and agree to disagree. The final place, and this is 
a final place, the prophetic integrity of Christ. I think 
there's a lot at stake in our understanding here. The text 
itself must drive our theology and our eschatology, not the 
other way around. It's like baptism. What do we 
let drive our practice of baptism? A theological tradition? A love 
for our children? Or the text of Scripture? We 
don't impose our theology upon the Bible. We construct our theology 
from exegesis from the Bible. The same is true with eschatology. 
Brethren, there's probably as many different views of the end 
times in this room as there are out there. Just make sure it's 
exegetically grounded. Make sure there's texts. We just 
assume a whole host of things, like the rebirth of the nation 
of Israel in 1948 is what the parable of the fig tree points 
to? Come on! There is nothing in the text 
that gives us any indication whatsoever of that and yet it's 
in the popular mind and we bring it to the passage and we regulate 
our understanding based on those assumptions. Don't do that. Exegete 
the passages. As well, the text itself underscores 
the prophetic integrity of our Lord Jesus. I mentioned Bertrand 
Russell said that the Lord Jesus was mistaken. He was wrong. Using 
that language of this generation, which I think Bertrand Russell 
understood in the reality of all these things, he concluded 
that the Lord was wrong because he thought he was going to come 
back to the people that were living at his time. Bertrand 
Russell understood all these things, and he understood this 
generation, but he didn't understand the spiritual nature of the coming 
and judgment. He thought, with the Futurists and the two events 
theories, that it was the second physical coming. But there's 
nothing in the passage that would dictate that reality. As well, 
to strengthen the Church's apologetic, Isaac gave me a helpful little 
book this past week on this very theme. We underscore the veracity 
of Christ's words. You see what happened in AD 70? 
You see what happened there? Our Lord prophesied that. Our 
Lord foretold that. There's people out there that 
aren't Christians, they have no dog in the fight of Matthew 
24, that read Josephus, the historian. Now imagine if we come alongside 
and say that Josephus is writing about something prophesied by 
our Lord. You ought to go examine that. 
They would conclude with Ryle, wow, Josephus is one of the best 
commentators on our Lord's words. Exactly. Do you realize that 
some persons have seen how accurate our Lord's predictions were that 
they said, he couldn't have done that before the destruction of 
Jerusalem. It's an ex-aventu prophecy. That means it's an after-the-fact 
prophecy. Just like they would do with 
Daniel. Daniel couldn't have actually predicted the things 
that Daniel predicted, so therefore somebody named Daniel or somebody 
using that moniker wrote that prophecy to try and validate 
who they... They do that with Christ because he was so right. 
He couldn't have been right. He couldn't have been predicting 
the future. He couldn't have been prophesying. He couldn't 
have been accurate. So he must have wrote after the fact. Or 
Matthew and Mark and Luke, they wrote after the fact and they 
put these words in Jesus' mouth just to strengthen the church. 
Well, brethren, we're conservative Christians. We're reformed believers. We understand the value of prophecy. And when our Lord speaks the 
truth, it comes to pass. Let us not sacrifice that apologetic 
reality that we can, in graciousness and with kindness, ram down in 
the throats of unbelievers and say, our Lord spoke it and it 
came to pass. As well, prophetic integrity 
of our Lord Jesus Christ is seen in his statement in Matthew 21. 
I'm sorry, Matthew 20. He announces to his disciples 
that he must go to Jerusalem, he must be arrested, he must 
be crucified, he must rise again. And it's just always amazed me, 
I just recently taught this to the older folk at the Cascade. 
On the heels of that, Jesus is saying, I must go die. The mother 
of Zebedee's sons comes and says, Lord, grant that my sons may 
sit on your right and on your left. That would be akin to me 
saying, you know, I'm probably going to die tomorrow, and you're 
saying, can I have your Jeddah? Or some of you theologues saying, 
can I have your books? Man, I'm not even in the ground 
yet, and you're asking for my books. That's what's happening 
there. Lord, grant that when you come 
in your kingdom, my sons may sit on your right and your left. 
He says, you don't know what you're asking. Are you able to 
go through the baptism that I go through? Are you willing to drink 
the cup? Are you able to drink the cup 
that I'm going to drink?" And they say, we are able. He underscores 
it's true because James is going to get his head chopped off in 
Acts chapter 12, and John's going to end up on the island of Patmos, 
which was not a sandals-type resort, but a rock out in the 
middle of the sea for the testimony of God and the Word of God and 
the testimony of Jesus Christ. So they would suffer. But then 
Jesus makes this point to tell them about the way that Gentiles 
rule over men. He says, it must not be so with 
you. And he underscores in verse 28, 
just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve 
and to give His life a ransom for many. That's why Christ came 
in to the city of Jerusalem. That's why Christ was there. 
That's why He went toe-to-toe with these religious leaders. 
That's why he was in that city, why he prophesied concerning 
the temple's doom. Do you realize that's one of 
the things they bring up at his trial? He said the temple was 
going to be destroyed! He did all this so that He would 
be delivered up, so that He would be crucified, so that He would 
suffer the wrath and fury and judgment of God, so that all 
who look to Him in faith will have everlasting life. If you 
leave this morning contra-preterism, fine, but do not leave contra-Christ. This is the day of salvation. Do not resist. Do not neglect. Do not reject. Do not rebel. Some of you all have heard this 
many, many times, and you continue to push it away. You continue 
to make arguments. You continue to rationalize. 
You continue to say, well, when I get older, or when I get smarter, 
or when I'm stopping having fun, then I'll make my peace with 
God through our Lord Jesus. Now is the acceptable time. Learn from the first century 
what the judgment and the fury and the wrath of Almighty God 
looks like. It was a siege of epic proportions 
that will be like nothing compared to that day when He comes again 
in glory to judge the living and the dead. The only hope, 
the only refuge, the only possibility for safety is not to run from 
Judea into the mountains, but to run to Christ. to run to the 
Lord Jesus, to believe on Him, to hear that He lived, He died, 
and He rose again, so that everyone who looks to Him in faith will 
have everlasting life. The prophet who spoke and predicted 
the fall of Jerusalem, and it came specifically clear, is the 
prophet who said, just as the Son of Man came, not to be served, 
but to serve, and to do what? To give His life a ransom for 
many. You need a ransom. You need a sacrifice. You need 
salvation because you've sinned against the Holy God. You have 
offended Him. You have violated every one of 
His commandments. His commandments are good. They're 
not burdensome. They're not harsh. They're not 
evil. They're not bad. And what have we done? We have 
trashed them. We have trampled upon them. We 
begin as idolaters. We continue as blasphemers. We 
break the Sabbath day. I suppose that many will leave 
here today and go break the Sabbath with no concern whatsoever to 
the God of the Sabbath who has said, don't break my day. We're 
insubordinate to the civil authority. Kids are insubordinate to their 
parental authority. We all got issues when it comes 
to submission. We don't like people telling 
us what to do. We're all murderers. Perhaps 
we don't take guns and sit up in clock towers and snipe people 
in the city square, but in our hearts we hate. In our hearts 
we're petty, we're slanderous, we're gossips that the apostles 
attach to that reality of murder. We are adulterers. We have violated 
the law of God. You say, well, I've never gone 
out from my wife, I've never gone out from my husband. Jesus 
says, if you've looked upon a woman to lust in your heart, you have 
broken the commandment. Who of you can say, oh, I'm without 
sin in this particular regard? Thieves. We're all thieves. You 
don't go and, you know, steal money from banks. Perhaps it's 
time. I mean, this is epidemic in our 
day, isn't it? You know who's actually a good 
worker nowadays? Somebody who just shows up and 
does what they're supposed to. What was commonplace and normal 
a hundred years ago is now the employee of the month. Why? Because 
he shows up and he does what he's supposed to. Because not 
everybody shows up and does what they're supposed to. They're 
on Twitter, they're on Facebook, they're playing Candy Crush when 
they're being paid by employers and thus are thieves. What about lies? Oh, I never 
tell a lie. Praise God for you. Aren't you 
wonderful? Scripture tells us that the Lord 
God is the Lord God of truth. That ninth word is binding upon 
us. Think about this in the political 
debates. I think about this in my own heart with reference to 
those politicians I disagree with. I don't know that I could 
verify everything that I always hear. Is it rash for me to just 
immediately jump on the bandwagon? This is an area of thought in 
my life. I don't know that I can do that and be mindful of the 
ninth word. And what about covetousness? 
We've not been found out by one denying covetousness. You shall 
not covet. This is the one that got Paul, 
isn't it? Romans 7. I wouldn't have known lust unless 
that tenth word said, do not covet. You see, God's law breaks 
us. God's law throws us down and 
shows us our need for the Redeemer. Do not leave here today. Do not 
leave here today without looking to Christ. I'd love it if you 
said, well, that interpretation of preterism makes sense. Yeah, 
now I can read my Bible. That's small potatoes. I want 
you to go to heaven. I want you to be with Jesus. I want you to go to that place 
where there is no more sorrow. It's a world of sorrows, isn't 
it? It's a world of pain. It's just like one thing after 
another. But in heaven, there's no sorrow, no pain, no hunger, 
no thirst, no death. We lose those people we love 
in this lifetime, but in heaven, no doubt. We'll be with Him forever 
and ever. See, brethren, this is the most 
important thing, the gospel of our salvation. Well, let us pray. Father, we thank You for Your 
Word, and we thank You for the prophet Christ, who's not only 
prophet, but he's priest. He not only offers, but he is 
the victim. He is the sacrifice at Calvary. 
We know he's prophet, priest, and king, where he reigns and 
rules over all things for the good of his church. And we do 
look forward to that day when he comes again in glory to judge 
the living and the dead. And our hope, our desire, our 
plea to you is that everyone here would be ready for that 
day, finding their safety, their stability, their security, their 
salvation in Jesus Christ by faith alone. Go with us now, 
we pray, and watch over your people. And we ask through Christ 
our Lord. Amen.