MATTHEW TWENTY-FOUR by J. H. Waggoner

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Sep 16, 1889

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 15, No. 36.

MATTHEW TWENTY-FOUR.

By J. H. Waggoner

BY THE LATE ELDER J. H. WAGGONER.

(Continued.)

IN connection with the claim put forth in regard to “the end of the world,” another is presented as follows:—

2. The disciples associated together all that the question contained, and placed “these things,” that is, the overthrow of the city, with the coming of Christ and the end of the world, or age.

But that is only conjecture. No one has a reason for affirming that such was the idea of the apostles. Here we might safely leave the affirmation, for no one is bound to disprove a conjecture. But we will further notice it.

If it were something more than conjecture,—if it were possible even to prove that such was their idea of the order of events then future,—that fact would not be evidence that they were or are to be fulfilled at the same time. For we know that, at that time, the disciples were laboring under mistakes in regard to the time and order of the fulfillment of future events. Take as proof of this, the parable which the Lord spake when he was going into Jerusalem. Luke 19. They thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. To correct this impression, the parable of the nobleman was spoken. If they understood the parable at the time when it was spoken, it did not fully do away with the impression in their minds, as is proved by what they did when they entered Jerusalem. We cannot believe that they would have hailed him as the son of David, and rejoiced before him as a king in his triumph, if they had realized that he was going into the city to be condemned and crucified as a malefactor. Palm branches and shouts of triumph did not attend the steps of the lowly and the condemned.

Again, after his resurrection he reproved two of his disciples who, though they had trusted that he would redeem Israel, were then sad and disheartened. They did not then understand that Christ ought “to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory.” The suffering part was still a mystery to them. And some of the apostles were so slow to realize that which he had spoken to them that they could hardly be persuaded that he was indeed risen from the dead. And after he had been with them full forty days, speaking to them of the things pertaining to the kingdom, they did not yet understand “the times and the seasons,” and therefore asked him, “Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?”

Would it, then, be surprising if they had been mistaken in the order of the events of which the Saviour spoke, at the time of his speaking, as recorded in Matthew 24? It would be quite natural for them to suppose that the holy city and the temple of the Most High would stand until the judgment and the final consummation. As we now see, had such been their opinion, it would not be proof that such was the chronological relation of these events. But, we repeat, that cannot be proved; it is only conjecture.

3. It is necessary to notice that prophecy is not always fulfilled in the order in which it is given. This is often seen in the Old Testament, where the two advents are sometimes spoken of in such close connection that the reader might suppose they would occur nearly together. It is seen in the book of Revelation, which contains several lines of prophecy, each reaching down to the close of the present dispensation. So in Matthew 24, and parallel chapters; we can only learn the correct application of some of the statements contained therein by comparing them with other scriptures. There is no dispute that they refer to the destruction of the temple and the overthrow of the city, as well as to the second coming of the Lord.

We will now offer several points of proof that this chapter was not all fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans; and that the coming of Christ, spoken of in Matthew 24, did not then take place, and has not yet taken place.