Chapter Twenty-Four

1–3. The occasion for Christ’s eschatological discourse. – 4–14. Events before the end. – 15–28. Tribulations before the second coming. – 29–31. The second coming. – 32–51. Exhortations to watchfulness.

Matthew 24:1. And when Jesus departed from the temple and was going away, His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. (Cf. Mark 13:1; Luke 21:5). The Synoptists point out precisely where the Savior departed with His disciples, namely to the Mount of Olives (verse 3; Mark 13:3), from which one could see the temple and Jerusalem well with all their then great splendor. This is confirmed by the remarks Matt 26:6 and Mark 14:3, from which it is evident that after the long “eschatological” discourse pronounced on the Mount of Olives, Jesus Christ arrived in Bethany without first returning to Jerusalem. He left the temple with the words “behold, your house is left to you desolate” (Matt 23:38). “He as it were shook off the dust from His feet before the house which was to remain empty.” On the way for a time the temple buildings ceased to be visible. But after a sharp turn on the road they appeared again to view in all their splendor. The disciples accompanying Christ and of course hearing His words about the desolation of the temple could not clearly and well imagine how this desolation would come about in place of the splendor which was visible to all. The building of the temple was begun about twenty years before the Common Era by Herod I and completed about the year 63 of the Common Era. The buildings were not yet finished but were already splendid. The temple was one of the wonders of the world. What was the purpose of this building? All Jews connected with Jerusalem and the temple the most brilliant hopes that would be fulfilled with the coming of the Messiah. And now the Messiah says that the temple will be desolate. Therefore the disciples approached Christ more closely (during the journey) and pointed out to Him the splendor of ἱεροῦ, that is, the temple itself and the buildings surrounding it. According to Mark, it is somewhat different: the disciples do not show Christ the buildings of the temple, but only one disciple speaks with Him about what stones and what buildings. In Luke again it is somewhat different: some – probably from among the disciples – spoke to Christ on the way about how the temple was adorned with “precious stones and offerings.” In all these accounts there is not the slightest contradiction in the testimony of the Synoptists, and all could have happened exactly as they relate, with one of them drawing attention to one thing and another to another.

Matthew 24:2. And Jesus said to them: Do you see all these things? Truly, I say to you: not one stone will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down. (Cf. Mark 13:2; Luke 21:6.) Since, according to Mark 13:1, only one disciple spoke with Christ, in Mark 13:2 He answers only to him. In Matthew and Luke He speaks with all the disciples. If the disciples could not reconcile the thought of the impending desolation of the temple and all its buildings with their then great splendor, Christ now only strengthens the thought He had expressed before, saying that in the temple there will be not only inner desolation but also outer, so that from what the disciples admire “not one stone will be left upon another.” All this was literally fulfilled. Κελεύει Καῖσαρ ἤδη τήν τε πόλιν ἅπασαν καὶ τὸν νεὼν κατασκάπτειν (the Caesar commanded to demolish the whole city and the temple), – says the Jewish historian (Josephus, “The Jewish War,” VII, 1, 1). During the Jewish war and the capture of Jerusalem by Titus the temple was burned, and “the city was razed to the ground.” Only three towers in the palace of Herod and part of the wall were left – the towers as monuments of what was once the fortress of the city, and the latter as a defense in case of a renewed siege. Titus celebrated his hard-won victory with many sacrifices by giving a laudatory address to the army, rewarding outstanding military deeds, offering a thanksgiving sacrifice, and holding a feast (Schürer). Jerusalem fell in September of the year 70 of the Common Era.

Matthew 24:3. Now when He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, His 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? (Cf. Mark 13:3; Luke 21:7.) As Jesus Christ was ascending to the Mount of Olives He stopped and sat down. Mark adds: “opposite the temple” (κατέναντι τοῦ ἱεροῦ). “Privately” (κατ´ ἰδίαν) shows that the conversation took place only in the presence of the disciples and the further discourse was spoken only to them. The expression ταῦτα (“these things”) in all the Synoptists apparently should not raise special confusion. Earlier Christ had spoken about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and the question, when “this” would be, from the disciples was natural and understandable. It may have been prompted as well by the fact that the disciples feared lest they themselves become witnesses to the destruction. What Christ was predicting was in itself terrible. In this could lie the basis for the question of the disciples. But if the first question (“when will this be?”) is entirely understandable and natural, then on the contrary the second presents significant difficulties for interpretation. Luke and, it seems, Mark confine themselves only to questions relating to the destruction of Jerusalem (St. John Chrysostom: ὁ δὲ Λουκᾶς ἕν φησιν εἶναι τὸ ἐρώτημα, τό περὶ τῶν Ἰεροσολύμων), – although in them there are not one but two questions. But Matthew to the question about the destruction of Jerusalem adds further questions about the so-called parusia, not altogether accurately rendered into Russian as “coming,” and about the “end of the age.” What does this mean? What connection is there between questions about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and about the “presence” of Christ and the end of the age? Clearly, to understand this we must pay attention to the very meaning of the expressions “parusia” and “end of the age.” The word “parusia” is found only in the Gospel of Matthew, first here and then in verses 37 and 39 – only in this one chapter, consequently. But it is found several times in the Apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:23; 1 Thess 2:19; 2 Thess 2:1), James (Jas 5:7-8), Peter (2 Pet 1:16) and John (1 John 2:28). In all these cases parusia of Christ is spoken of. But besides, in the Apostle Paul alone is found the use of this word generally of people (1 Cor 16:17; 2 Cor 7:6-7; Phil 1:26) or of the antichrist (2 Thess 2:9); into Russian παρουσία is translated sometimes as “arrival,” sometimes as “presence,” sometimes as “coming.” Parusia can mean coming (adventus), but only in a figurative sense. The proper meaning of the word – from the preposition παρά, indicating closeness, and εἰμί, I am – is presence, and moreover a close, personal manifestation. According to usage in the Apostle Paul, when he speaks of Christ, the word means generally His second coming. Nowhere in the New Testament is it used of the Incarnation of Christ, even in 2 Pet 1:16. The word is found in Ignatius (“Epistle to the Philadelphians,” 9, 2), where also it is used in the sense of the second coming of Jesus Christ (ἐξαίρετον δὲ τι ἔχει τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ σωτῆρος, κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, τὸ πάθος αὐτοῦ καί τὴν ἀνάστασιν), Hermas (“Pastor,” 58 – ἡ δὲ ἀποδημία τοῦ δεσπότου ὁ χρόνος ὁ περισσεύων εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν αὐτοῦ), Justin (Dialogus cum Tryphone, 52, 1 – προεφητεύθη, ὅτι δύο τοῦ Χριστοῦ παρουσίαι ἔσονται). By the word παρουσία, used in the Apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:23), is meant, it is evident, not only the coming of Christ in itself, but also the power and might belonging to Him to raise the dead. In proposing their questions to Christ, the disciples could hardly have thought about resurrection. But that they attributed to Christ some extraordinary power not belonging to an ordinary person is evident from the fact that they connected His second presence with συντελεία τοῦ αἰῶνος – the end of the age. This expression is even more difficult than parusia. In meaning the word συντελεία is the same as τέλος, but with this difference, that at least sometimes it means the conclusion of something with the participation of some person. If the disciples had expressed themselves differently: “what will be the sign of Your presence and of the end of the age?” and had used τέλος here, this would mean that the end of the age would be independent of the personal presence of Christ. In other words, the disciples would have proposed to Christ not one but two questions, the first – about His appearance, presence, coming, and the second – about the end of the age. But the word συντελεία establishes a connection between the end of the age and the coming of Christ. From this it is evident how important this gospel expression is for exegesis and apologetics. No ordinary person could have been asked such a question. It was proposed and could be proposed only to One whom the questioners recognized as the Messiah. From this it is also evident that the disciples proposed to Christ not three questions, as Jerome affirmed (interrogant triä quo tempore Jerusalem destruenda sit; quo venturus Christus; quo consummatio saeculi futura sit), but two, because the latter questions represent, as it were, only a twofold form of one and the same question (grammatically one). “End of the age” (συντελεία τοῦ αἰῶνος) was “a technical apocalyptic expression.” One can agree with this because the expression used in the prophet Daniel (Dan 12:4 – the translation of the Seventy), apparently became current and passed into the apocalyptic literature of that time (see Ep. of Barnabas 13:3, 27:15, 29:8, 30:3, 54:21, 56:2, 59:8, 82:2, 83:7, 23; Ass. Mos. 1, 18; Enoch 16:1 and others). In the Gospels συντελεία is found only in Matthew (Matt 13:39-40, Matt 13:49) and once in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb 9:26). The word “age” is found very frequently in the New Testament. It does not mean here, as is justly remarked, “world” or “universe,” but precisely “age,” that is, a known period of time with its special characteristics. The question of the disciples can therefore be rephrased thus: what will be the sign of Your presence (coming) and of the renewal connected with it of this world, its transformation for the better? The inadequacy of the condition of society then forced many to strive for something better and to expect it. The prophets predicted this better condition. Later these hopes degenerated into chiliasm. “In the question of the disciples it is supposed that between the destruction of Jerusalem and the second coming of Christ there will be an interval, during which they will not see Him again. The disciples could not help noticing this; and therefore neither their question nor the discourse of the Lord set as an aim to unite both these events. This is necessary to keep in mind when studying the words of Christ” (Edersheim). The age of which the disciples spoke was “the present evil age.”

Matthew 24:4. Jesus said to them in answer: See to it that no one deceives you, (Cf. Mark 13:5; Luke 21:8.) The Savior’s words serve as an answer to the questions proposed by the disciples (ἀποκριθείς – only in Matthew). It is not clear why βλέπετε is rendered in the Russian translation as “see to it,” although of course the word has this meaning. Better – observe carefully, look. The translation “deceives you” is not precise, does not express the sense of the original and obscures the discourse. Deceive how? In the Greek in all the evangelists πλανάω, which means to lead astray from the right path, to cause to wander, to lead this way and that, to deceive. Thus the disciples ought to observe carefully so that no one would lead them into error and deceive them. As is evident, the first question of the disciples, “when will these things (that is, the destruction of Jerusalem) be,” is left without answer, at least not directly. To the second question about coming and the end of the age no direct answer is given in verse 4. But since the discourse that follows deals precisely with this, verse 4 can be viewed as an introduction to the entire further discourse. It is correctly noted that in the further discourse of Christ there is set forth if not exclusively then primarily practical teaching, that it aims not to prematurely reveal the fate of the world and determine the hour and day (generally the time) of the end of the world, but only to teach the disciples how they ought to conduct themselves in constant expectation of the end of the world. This “eschatological discourse” of Christ is full of insurmountable difficulties for interpretation, which is entirely understandable since here the matter is about the future fate of the world. An enormous amount of effort has been expended on its explanation. It has been the cause of numerous errors resulting from improper interpretations of it. For its proper interpretation it is above all necessary to keep in mind that in it, on the one hand, there is discourse about the fate of Jerusalem, on the other – about the future fate of kingdoms, and on the third – about the end of the world. This threefold meaning of it we will for brevity call the first, second and third meaning. It has, though slight, a relation to the fate and life of each individual person. Some (not without success) have attempted to interpret it exclusively about the fate of Jerusalem and the Jewish people, others – only about the end of the world and the second coming. Both interpretations can be considered correct. To understand how this happens one must keep in mind that the discourse reveals such events which, as we have said, can be viewed from three main viewpoints or perspectives. This is easier to see by example. If a person stands in some flat place an open horizon extends before him; if he rises several fathoms higher the space before him expands and the horizon recedes; if yet higher the horizon opens further. So it is with Christ’s discourse. If we view it from the lowest viewpoint we will find that in it almost everything can be explained relatively to the nearest events – the capture and destruction of Jerusalem; if we rise higher we will see a prediction about the fate of nations and kingdoms; if yet higher – then about the last fate of the world. Among these three main viewpoints there are, it is understood, many intermediate ones which make one thing intelligible for some and another for others. The discourse reveals the most subtle and comprehensive knowledge of popular psychology, in part already tested and proved by history. No one could have spoken such a discourse except Christ. To understand this we must suppose that some historian, or scholar, or simply a seer tried to set forth briefly and in general terms (in the space of 51 verses) the past and already familiar fate of humanity. We could not expect their work to be wholly perfect because to embrace and briefly set forth all the mass of past events is difficult for any person whatever knowledge he may possess. This example enables us to understand how difficult, even if only in general terms, is it to speak exclusively about the future fate of humanity. Such a task could not be executed with such perfection by anyone except Christ. Many have attempted to prove that His discourse is only a reflection of contemporary Jewish eschatology. But Edersheim with a mass of citations proves that Jewish eschatology moved in a completely opposite direction from the thinking of Christ. The genuineness of this discourse is disputed little. “The orderly unity of the discourse in Matthew,” says Zahn, “excludes the hypothesis that here was inserted into the original context material derived not from the remembrance of the sayings of Jesus but from some Jewish or Christian apocalypse.” The contrast between the Jewish picture of the last judgment and that which is outlined in the Gospels is so striking that this alone can serve as a defense (if needed) of the eschatological section of the New Testament, as well as proof of what an enormous distance exists between the teaching of Christ and the theology of the synagogue (Edersheim). In the verse under consideration the Savior speaks above all of the impatience of the disciples. In it lies the danger that “they will become the victims of deceptive announcements about His presence” (Zahn). Therefore He invites them to caution; they must be on guard so that while waiting for the true Messiah they do not fall into some deception.

Matthew 24:5. For many will come in My name, saying, “I am the Christ,” and will deceive many. (Cf. Mark 13:6; Luke 21:8.) The same thought is repeated further in Matthew in completely different expressions (verses 23–26) and in parallel passages in Mark (Mark 13:21-22) and Luke (Luke 17:23); in the latter in a different context. The question about how Christ’s words correspond to historical reality was already raised by Origen, who said that during the time of the apostles few people called themselves christs, except only Dositheos the Samaritan, on account of whom (his followers) are called dositheans; and also Simon, of whom it is reported in the Acts of the Apostles, proclaiming himself as the great power of God (qui se virtutem esse Dei magnam pronunciabat). Besides them, so far as Origen knew, there were (no false christs) neither before nor after. Theophylact speaks of those same persons as Origen, but Zigabenus adds also Menander “and others.” Jerome – only of Simon the sorcerer, later exegetes – also of Theudas and an unknown Egyptian of whom Josephus Flavius reports (“The Jewish War”) and Luke (Acts 21:38). To explain why there is so little information about persons who took on the name of Messiah, we say that these persons – ψευδόχριστοι – were always too microscopic to leave deep traces in history after themselves. It is certain that even at present there exist many persons (among, for example, the khlysty) calling themselves “christs” and “goddesses of God,” but anyone not thoroughly familiar with the history of khlystvism would be at a loss to name definite individuals taking on such a title. The same could be true in the intervals between Christ’s death and the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. Messianic expectation, strongly developed at that time and generating a whole messianic literature, could not be merely theoretical but must have expressed itself practically, although we cannot know exactly the persons who took on the title of Messiah. It is very probable that the examples of Theudas and the Egyptian were not the only ones, as is usually the case. As for the existence of false messiahs after the destruction of Jerusalem, there were many; they exist, as we said above, even at present, and undoubtedly will appear in great numbers before the final world catastrophe, which will be followed by a complete renewal of the present sinful world. The word “deceive” in the Russian translation is as imprecise as in verse 4.

Matthew 24:6. You will also hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for all these things must take place, but the end is not yet: (Cf. Mark 13:7; Luke 21:9.) One reading the history of the Jewish war by Josephus Flavius can fully see that all this occurred before the destruction of Jerusalem. Vespasian did not besiege Jerusalem right away but first subdued the Galileans. Thus began wars and rumors of wars in Palestine. After the peaceful century of Augustus the whole world at that time was full of them. This is witnessed by Tacitus at the beginning of his History (Historia, I, 2). In the year 38 of the Common Era riots began in Alexandria giving occasion to complaints of the Jews against Flaccus and his removal; around the same time in Seleucia during riots more than 50,000 Jews were killed. There was a severe uprising also in Jamnia, near Joppa. Theophylact refers Christ’s words to “the military actions of the Romans around Jerusalem.” This is the first meaning of Christ’s words. The second is that “wars and rumors of wars” especially incline people to the acceptance of Christ, and at this time He usually comes to them invisibly. The third is the special development of wars and rumors of wars before the Last Judgment and the end of the world. About “be not alarmed” see 2 Thess 2:2. “All these things” – πάντα ταῦτα – is not in the best manuscripts. Therefore the translation should be as follows: “see that you are not alarmed, for it must come to pass.” In Mark it is literally similar to Matthew (but without γάρ and the following ἐστίν), in Luke πάντα is added (but without πάντα). Wars and rumors of wars alone ought not to give the disciples grounds for the thought that along with them the end (of Jerusalem, of kingdoms, of the world) has arrived.

Matthew 24:7. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there will be famines, pestilences and earthquakes in various places; (Cf. Mark 13:8; Luke 21:10-11.) In Matthew and Mark the expressions are almost the same, but Luke conveys Christ’s discourse differently and more fully than the other Synoptists. The constant existence of conflict among nations and kingdoms, famine and earthquakes is hardly in need of proof. Therefore all this could be and was before the destruction of Jerusalem, and after it, and will be before the Last Judgment. During great crises in the history of humanity all these calamities have been and are felt by people with special force. This is an indubitable historical fact of a general character. However, from that time they point to several cases in which they see the literal fulfillment of Christ’s words. Thus in the year 45 or 47 there was a severe earthquake in Crete, in 51 – in Rome, in 53 – in Apamea and Phrygia, in 60 – in Laodicea and Phrygia and others. It is historically known that roughly at that time there were four famines (cf. Acts 11:28), twice – plague, which claimed 30,000 victims in Rome.

Matthew 24:8. All this is but the beginning of the birth pangs. (Cf. Mark 13:8 (end)). “Birth pangs” – ὠδίνων, properly the pangs of childbirth. During the evolutionary process of the world first there are, as with a woman in labor, only forerunners of further pangs, and then the pangs themselves begin. The reference here is apparently not to the “messianic woes.” In 3Ezr 15-16 there is a detailed discourse about similar calamities (cf. especially 3Ezr 16:39-40).

Matthew 24:9. Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and will kill you; and you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake; (Cf. Mark 13:9-11; Luke 21:12-14.) In Matthew the detailed discourse of Mark and Luke is set forth briefly. It was set forth by Matthew earlier in another place – when the apostles were sent forth to preach (Matt 10:17-21), therefore the evangelist does not now repeat the words said before. The words of this verse can be referred to the persecution of Christians by Nero, to the treatment of Judaizers toward the Apostle Paul and so forth. The Apostle Paul says: “We are reviled but we bless; we are persecuted but we endure; we are slandered, but we entreat. We have become, and are still, like the refuse of the world, like the scum of all things” (1 Cor 4:13). The opinion that here the Savior is speaking not to the disciples but addresses Himself to the Church seems incorrect. It is more correct to think that the discourse is to the disciples and (through them) to the Church.

Matthew 24:10. And then many will be led into sin, and will betray one another and hate one another; About “will be led into sin” see the commentaries to Matt 5:29. The whole verse is in sense the same as the discourse Matt 10:21-22 (see commentaries).

Matthew 24:11. And many false prophets will appear and will deceive many people; The statement is not identical with verse 5: there it speaks of false christs, here – of false prophets. “Do you see the threefold war, namely with deceivers, enemies and false brothers?” (St. John Chrysostom). In another place Chrysostom counts seven battles here, and even far more: “Do you see the numberless kinds of battles, new and unusual?” Bengel notes that at first false christs come (verse 5); in the middle – false prophets (verse 11), and finally – both (verse. 24). Gradatio bimembris (twofold progression). About false prophets and false teachers in the early apostolic Church it is especially clear in Acts 20:30; 2 Pet 2:1; 1 John 2:18, 1 John 2:22-23; 2 John 1:7; in the Epistle of Jude; Rom 16:17-18; Gal 1:7-9; Col 2:18; 1 Tim 1:6-7; 1 Tim 6:3-5; 1 Tim 6:3-5; 2 Tim 2:18; Rev 16:13. About false apostles 2 Cor 11:13.

Matthew 24:12. And because of the increase of lawlessness the love of most will grow cold. If lawlessness or immorality, which is also lawlessness, becomes established in a family, then, as all know, love ceases among the members of the family. This is equally true with regard to separate societies, states and peoples. By the absence of mutual love among citizens one can always judge that lawlessness has become established among them; by the existence and development of lawlessness one can conclude that mutual love among citizens has ceased. In a few words here is captured and expressed the most subtle popular psychology.

Matthew 24:13. But he who endures to the end will be saved. (Cf. Mark 13:13; Luke 21:19. Cf. Matt 10:22; 2 Tim 2:12; Heb 3:6; Rev 2:26.) Some thought that “to the end” means death, others – the destruction of Jerusalem, still others – a period of trials, fourth – the appearance of Jesus Christ at His second coming. It should be noted that if the words of Christ in Matthew and Mark here are literally the same, in Luke it is a completely different expression: “By your endurance save your lives.” Why such a difference came about is impossible to understand. But Luke’s words shed light on the expressions preserved in Matthew and Mark. The general thought of all these sayings is that salvation depends on patience and endurance during calamities. This corresponds generally to the character of ordinary worldly struggle. In fact those are considered victorious not who grow weak and fall on the field of battle but those who on the bloody trail of their corpses approach the appointed goal. By “end” here is understood the conclusion not of personal but of general calamities befalling humanity. With the cessation of calamities will come salvation and joy as after the pangs of childbirth. Salvation appears to be implied not only external but also spiritual, moral and eternal. A person who has passed through the furnace of trial becomes δόκιμος – discerning, wise, tried (cf. Jas 1:12).

Matthew 24:14. And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. (Cf. Mark 13:10 – a transposition made for unknown reasons.) Blessed Augustine says: “If anyone thinks that the words: ‘this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world’ means that the apostles themselves did this, then on the basis of reliable testimony one can prove that this did not happen. For there are in Africa countless peoples among which the Gospel has not yet been proclaimed.” Such an understanding of the matter seems somewhat narrow. One reading apostolic history sees that even before the destruction of Jerusalem evangelical preaching took on such broad dimensions that if not absolutely then in a relative sense one could say that the Gospel was preached then throughout the whole world. One can also say about the present time that Christianity is a universal religion, although many peoples are still not enlightened by the light of the Gospel. The absolute meaning Christ’s words should receive before the end of the world when all peoples will learn about Christ and His teaching, which is quite possible to assume in view of the extraordinary zeal with which over the course of almost two thousand years (a fact unprecedented in the history of other religions) evangelical preaching has been carried on. The word “end” here means not only the end of Jerusalem but also the end of kingdoms (in general world upheavals) and of the world.

Matthew 24:15. Therefore when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel standing in the holy place – let the reader understand – (Cf. Mark 13:14; Luke 21:20.) Zahn says that the words Luke 21:20-24 stand out from the parallel with the general basis of the discourse in Matthew and Mark. This section in Luke begins the same way as in Matthew in the verse under consideration and Mark (Mark 13:14) with the expression ὅταν δὲ ἴδητε. As in Matthew and Mark so also in Luke in the discourse about desolation there is the same offer to inhabitants of Jerusalem to flee to the mountains and there is mention of grief for pregnant women and those nursing in those days. But in the rest the content in Luke is entirely different, namely: in him are depicted the siege and destruction of Jerusalem, the death of many inhabitants, the captivity of the rest and a long period of the dominion of the Gentiles in Jerusalem. In Matthew and Mark – the last pangs of society which will end with the coming of Jesus Christ. Here, says Zahn, all the art of harmonizers refuses to serve. It is difficult to agree with such an opinion. The prophetic discourse of Christ in many cases resembles scales which incline now this way now that way. Sometimes the Savior speaks very closely about the impending events in Jerusalem as if they touch it directly and the center of gravity seems to be in them. But one must not forget that the scale pan is ready to incline in another direction right away, and then His discourse begins to mean something else. It is hard to suppose that Christ in the verse of Matthew under consideration said absolutely nothing about the destruction of Jerusalem, but it is also hard to suppose that He did not touch here on His second coming, borrowing images from the calamities threatening Jerusalem. Luke emphasizes more the first meaning, Matthew and Mark – the second. Thus there is no contradiction in the testimony of the evangelists. The particle “therefore” (οὖν) placed at the beginning of the verse shows that the new discourse is connected with the preceding. Here lies the answer to the question of the disciples “when will this be.” This particle has always been difficult for commentators. It indicates that verse 15 is a conclusion from the preceding discourse. But is not an anachronism introduced here? Is it not strange to make a conclusion from what must happen at the end of the age and thus regulate what will happen at the destruction of Jerusalem? In reality there is nothing strange here. It is not the future destruction of the world that serves as an image of the destruction of Jerusalem but the reverse. Therefore John is correct when he says that οὖν does not express that the Savior returns to His former thought because here discourse is about what was not said before but only a further thought is carried forward joined to the former. The passages from the book of the prophet Daniel to which the Savior refers here are found in the prophecy about the seventy weeks and are considered very obscure and therefore are translated in different ways (Dan 9:26-27). For us here it is important only that in one case (Dan 9:27) the Seventy translate the Hebrew expression (“shikutzim meshomem” – plural) through βδέλυγμα τῶν ἐρημώσεων and in another (“shikutz shomem” – Dan 12:11) – through τὸ βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως. In the Gospels the article τῆς is placed before ἐρημώσεως which is not in the translation of the Seventy in Dan 12:11. It is more probable however that the gospel expression corresponds to the latter place and is derived from it. “Shikutz shomem,” βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως, “abomination of desolation,” as was supposed, became among the Hebrews something like a terminus technicus for designating idols set up in the temple and the idolatry connected with them. In this sense the expression is used in 1 Macc 1:54 where it says that “on the fifteenth day of Chislev” (December) “in the one hundred forty-fifth year” (168 BC) “the Syrians (Antiochus Epiphanies) set up the abomination of desolation” (βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως) on the altar and “on the twenty-fifth day of the month” (Chislev) sacrifices were offered “on the altar which was upon the altar.” The same meaning of “abomination of desolation” could be intended by the prophet Daniel. But what exactly the Savior meant predicting the abomination of desolation in Jerusalem is difficult to say. Jerome said that this expression could either be understood simply about the antichrist or about the image of Caesar which Pilate set up in the temple or about the equestrian statue of Hadrian which stood in the Holy of Holies until the time when Jerome lived. Some supposed that by the abomination of desolation here is meant the horrible deeds of the zealots during the siege of Jerusalem by Vespasian and Titus. But whatever horrors were committed by the zealots they were alien to idolatry. On the basis of what has been said one should suppose that the Savior takes the well-known biblical saying only in a general sense as understood by the Jews in which pagan power brings devastation – makes the city and temple a waste. In this general sense Josephus Flavius also expressed it regarding the desolation which was predicted by Daniel and brought about by the Romans (Antiquitates iudaicae, X, 11, 7 – ὁ Δανίηλος καὶ περὶ τῆς ‘Ρωμαίων ἡγεμονίας ἀνέγραψε, καὶ ὅτι ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν ἐρημωθήσεται). “Let the reader understand” – the translation is exact. But here it is difficult to say whether these are the words of Christ or the evangelist. Most commentators think this was a “church note” which like the ascription in Matt 6:13 has crept into the text. Some assert that this supposition is entirely arbitrary because the same expression is found in Mark. The solution of the question depends on how to understand the word ἀναγιγνώσκω in the sense of “to notice,” “to recognize,” “to understand,” or in the more concrete – “to read.” The word has both meanings. In the first case it was said by Christ Himself, in the second it cannot be attributed to Him but only to the evangelists. The first is more probable.

Matthew 24:16. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains; (Cf. Mark 13:14; Luke 21:21.) As soon as the disciples of Christ notice in the holy place signs of the beginning of the abomination of desolation they should not delay but save themselves in the mountains. The disciples of Christ remembered this commandment and saved themselves (Eusebius of Caesarea, “Ecclesiastical History,” III, 5). Fleeing to the mountains was perhaps customary among the Jews when some danger threatened them (cf. 1 Macc 2:28).

Matthew 24:17. And let him who is on the housetop not come down to take anything out of his house; (Cf. Mark 13:15; Luke 21:21. Cf. Luke 17:31.) The expressions in Matthew and Mark are similar but in Luke they are entirely different. It is again a reminder of the necessity to save oneself by flight during danger. Of course the discourse of Christ is figurative.

Matthew 24:18. And let him who is in the field not turn back to get his garment. (Cf. Mark 13:16.) In Luke further there is an inserted discourse (Luke 21:22), which is not in Matthew and Mark whose expressions are approximately similar. If one cannot come down from the roof into the house itself then much less from the field should one return to take even one garment. An indication of the custom in hot countries where one works without outer clothing.

Matthew 24:19. And woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing infants in those days! (Cf. Mark 13:17; Luke 21:23.) The discourse is literally the same in all the Synoptists. For women with children it is very difficult to escape by flight. Speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem Origen notes: “And there was no mercy then neither for pregnant women nor for those nursing nor for the children themselves.” About the terrible suffering of the Jews and Jerusalem Josephus tells in “The Jewish War” (cf. Eusebius of Caesarea, “Ecclesiastical History,” III, 5, 6).

Matthew 24:20. Pray that your flight may not be in the winter or on a Sabbath, (Cf. Mark 13:18 – omits the words “or on a Sabbath.”) Luke does not have this verse at all. The discourse is about the incredible difficulties of escape. The note in Matthew about “on a Sabbath” is characteristic and shows distinctly Jewish character. There were cases when the Jews were slain by enemies solely because they refused to do anything on the Sabbath (1 Macc 2:32-37; 2 Macc 5:25-26). Christ says that calamity can strike His disciples on such days when they are enjoying rest. Such discourse of a general character also carries a somewhat special coloration relating specifically to the disciples of the Savior from among the Jews. There is no discussion here at all about some Pharisaic observance of the Sabbath. It is simply a figurative expression whose purpose was to urge not to be hindered even by religious institutions in order to avoid danger.

Matthew 24:21. For then there will be great tribulation such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever will be. (Cf. Mark 13:19; Luke 21:23.) Christ’s discourse is very similar to Dan 12:1: “and there will be a time of such suffering as has not been since nations came into existence until that time” (ἐκείνη ἡ ἡμέρα θλίψεως οἵα οὐκ ἐγενήθη ἀφ´ οὗ ἐγενήθησαν ἕως τῆς ἡμερας ἐκείνης cf. Jer 30:7; 1 Macc 9:27). “For” is referred not only to the preceding (verse 19) but generally to the entire discourse of verses 16–20. The word “then” does not refer only to the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. With regard to the destruction of Jerusalem the prediction of the Savior is fully confirmed by the accounts of Josephus Flavius in “The Jewish War.”

Matthew 24:22. And if those days had not been cut short no flesh would be saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short. (Cf. Mark 13:20; Luke 21:24.) In Mark the discourse is similar to Matthew, in Luke it is entirely different. According to Augustine’s interpretation by “days” is meant the calamities themselves (mala ipsa) just as in other places of Sacred Scripture mention is made of unfortunate, calamitous and evil days (Gen 47:9; Ps 93:13; Eph 5:16). “No flesh” – a Hebraism (“lo kol”) means: no one of the living people and even animals. This of course has a general meaning. But Chrysostom thinks that here by all flesh the Savior “understands the Jews.” Christ’s prediction was fulfilled on the Jews. More than a million of them perished during the siege of Jerusalem by Vespasian and Titus, 97,000 were carried into captivity. In total if one relies on the testimony of Josephus Flavius during the Jewish war 1,356,460 Jews perished. The idea that God spares the wicked for the sake of the righteous is characteristic of the Old Testament (Gen 18:24-33). By “elect” here can be understood Christians or in general righteous people (cf. Rom 11:12-29). They also point out the circumstances why in fact during the siege of Jerusalem the “days were cut short.” Titus conducted his campaign against the Jews quickly being intent on accompanying his father to Rome and taking part in his triumphal procession and the following celebrations.

Matthew 24:23. Then if anyone says to you, “Look, here is the Christ!” or “There he is!” – do not believe it. (Cf. Mark 13:21.) Hopes for a deliverer or deliverers have always been natural in times of grave suffering. And among the Jews they were especially strong. Various people could have taken advantage of this (and did in fact take advantage) who gathered the people to lead them in bloody struggle. Whether they called themselves messiahs is unknown (except for Bar Kokhba, Schürer, Geschichte, I, S. 685; and perhaps Theudas). But that such people could appear can be considered an indubitable historical fact.

Matthew 24:24. For there will appear false messiahs and false prophets and will show great signs and wonders so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. (Cf. Mark 13:22.) These words can be explained in three ways (tripliciter – Jerome): either about the time of the siege by the Romans of Jerusalem or about the end of the world or according to Jerome about the struggle of heretics with the Church and about such antichrists who under the false appearance of knowledge struggle against the Church. About false messiahs in the New Testament only here and in the parallel place in Mark. Historically to prove the fulfillment of the prophecy before the destruction of Jerusalem is impossible. False messiahs together with false prophets will show great (but false) wonders to deceive the credulous people (πλανηθῆναι) but not only this people but even the best people the elect.

Matthew 24:25. See, I have told you beforehand. (Cf. Mark 13:23. In Mark it is somewhat fuller and different. Cf. John 16:4; 2 Cor 7:3.) An emphasis of the preceding and subsequent discourse pointing to its importance. Something like a pedagogical device frequently used.

Matthew 24:26. If therefore they say to you, “Behold, He is in the desert,” – do not go out; “Behold, He is in the secret chambers,” – do not believe them; (Cf. Luke 17:23 – in a different context and more similar to Matt 24:23 and Mark 13:21 than to the verse under consideration.) The subject in the Greek is not expressed (in Russian the emphasized “He”). But it is clear that the discourse is about the true Christ of whom the people or false prophets will proclaim. The followers of Christ should not go forth at such calls and should not believe rumors about the Messiah. The true appearance of the true Christ will be entirely different and will leave no doubt in anyone.

Matthew 24:27. For as lightning comes from the east and flashes as far as the west so will be the coming of the Son of Man; (Cf. Luke 17:24 – in a different context.) One cannot agree with Bengel that credibile est Christi adventum fore ab oriente (it is probable that the coming of Christ will be from the east) because the original says nothing about this. The reference to the east and west is of an indifferent character; one could have said the opposite. The coming of Christ is only compared to the ordinary brightness of lightning especially at night when it seems that the whole heavenly vault is illuminated by it. Reference is made to quickness and suddenness. In some manuscripts there is no καί (and) after οὕτως (so the coming... will be). From this verse the coming of Christ becomes the predominant theme of the discourse. Lesser matters are as if absorbed by the more important. But in the discourse as before one can find the first and second meaning.

Matthew 24:28. For wherever the corpse is there the eagles will gather. (Cf. Luke 17:37.) It seems the real meaning of the verse is that the second coming of the Savior will be at a predetermined time when evil reaches its destructive development as before the flood or the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. When life leaves the body it becomes a corpse and eagles gather to it. So it will be then when in the world the strongest development of evil occurs. The Son of Man and His Angels will appear then to execute the Divine judgment.

Matthew 24:29. And immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will grow dark and the moon will not give its light and the stars will fall from heaven and the powers of heaven will be shaken; (Cf. Mark 13:24-25; Luke 21:25.) If the beginning of the discourse most closely concerned the fate of Jerusalem and the Jewish people and only figuratively could it be interpreted about the fate of kingdoms and the world then now the reverse is true. We must add that the meaning of the entire discourse is extremely subtle and it seems even impossible to express it in simple interpretive discourse. Here lies hidden the same truth that is also evident in the discourses of other Old Testament prophets. For example in the prophet Isaiah: “Arise shine for your light has come and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you” (Isa 60:1). Only through subtle analysis can one understand that this truth applies also to destroyed Jerusalem with all the suffering it has endured. The same is in the words of Christ. The word εύθεως (“immediately”) has caused numerous difficulties for critics who “used a microscope to examine what should be viewed through a telescope.” The word has very broad meaning and meaning “immediately” “soon” even “at once” points also to enormous intervals of time about which nothing can be said seeing that Christ’s prediction relates to future time. The word has as it were both miniature and extensive cosmic meaning. In His discourse Christ as it were rises higher and higher toward heaven. First He speaks of the sun and moon then of the stars and finally of the powers acting in the highest spheres of being. Here in general is depicted “the day of the Lord” great and terrible. It will be terrible even for nature itself. “The sun will grow dark and the moon will not give its light and the stars will fall from heaven” (this expression is usually understood in a figurative sense but can be in a literal sense) “and the powers of heaven will be shaken.” All this is figurative expression and what they actually mean is unknown. The application of Newton’s Principia in the interpretation cannot be considered. It would be “as reasonable as to explain Euclid by Homer and Homer by Euclid.” We can observe here only the similarity with the predictions and majestic visions of the ancient prophets (Isa 5:30; Jer 4:28; Ezek 32:7-8; Joel 2:10-11; Amos 8:9-10; Mic 3:6; Zeph 1:15; Zech 14:6; Hag 2:21 and others).

Matthew 24:30. Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man 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; (Cf. Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27.) What is the “sign of the Son of Man” that will appear in heaven? John Chrysostom interpreted this expression positively – about the cross. “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven” that is the cross which is brighter than the sun so that the sun grows dark and is hidden but the cross appears; it would not appear if it were not much brighter than the sun’s rays.” Others interpreted “sign” to mean either an extraordinary star (as at Christ’s birth) or Christ Himself or there will be a resurrection of the dead. The second coming of the Son of Man will not be like the first. He will come “on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” Whether these power and glory will be only external or spiritual or both together nothing definite can be said and all attempts to solve these questions seem only conjectural.

Matthew 24:31. And He will send His angels with a loud trumpet and they will gather His elect from the four winds from the ends of heaven to the ends thereof. (Cf. Mark 13:27; Luke 21:28 here adds words which are not in Matthew and Mark.) All the expressions are figurative. Instead of “with a loud trumpet” in the original “with a great trumpet” (μετὰ σάλπιγγος μεγάλης). Mark does not have this expression. In a few manuscripts “voice” (φωνῆς) is added (as in the Russian translation) some entirely omit the expression “with a great trumpet” or “loud.” “From the four winds” that is from all regions. “For from each end blows its own wind and there are (of the winds) four they are especially winds” (Euthymius Zigabenus). The word ἄκρος means “upper” “extreme.” It is used here instead of “limits” “boundaries” (ἄκρα δέ τὰ ῥηθέντα πέρατα – Euthymius Zigabenus). Cf. 1 Cor 15:52; 1 Thess 4:16.

Matthew 24:32. From the fig tree learn this lesson: when its branch has already become soft and puts forth leaves you know that summer is near; (Cf. Mark 13:28; Luke 21:29-30.) The depiction of the coming of Christ and the Last Judgment ends in the preceding verse and from verse 32 onward there are exhortations of a more practical character; and such discourse continues throughout the entire chapter 25. The fig tree serves here as only a “parable”; the word is considered here equivalent to the word “example” (παράδειγμα). The fig tree was one of the chief objects of local cultivation long before the Jews conquered Palestine. The failure of figs testified to a national calamity. What is meant in the Russian translation by “branches... become soft” is difficult to understand. In the original “shoots... tender” (κλάδος... ἁπαλός) – reference is made to the budding of buds and young shoots. This happens before the arrival of hot spring and summer days. By the opening of trees we too judge the arrival of warm days and the approach of summer. The thought of the verse under consideration is clarified in what follows.

Matthew 24:33. So also when you see all these things you know that it is near at the doors. (Cf. Mark 13:29; Luke 21:31.) The explanation of the verse fully depends on what to understand by “all these things” (ταῦτα πάντα or according to other readings πάντα ταῦτα). The question about the meaning of this expression has been a stumbling block for many exegetes. When answering this question one thing is absolutely certain: that here is not meant “all” about which was spoken prophetically in the immediately preceding verses (verses 29–31) or in general about what was said in verses 5–31. But what then? Chrysostom understands here “what happened to Jerusalem: wars famine pestilence earthquakes false messiahs false prophets the worldwide proclamation of the Gospel rebellions dissensions and everything that ought to happen before His coming.” The answers to this question from other commentators are dim. It was said for example that by “all this” is meant what gave cause to the revelation given by Christ. It is most probable to suppose that here are meant generally the signs of the times about which Christ spoke earlier in chapter 24. As by the deeds of a person one can judge his character inclinations and habits so also by phenomena occurring in human society and in the whole world one can judge the condition of society and the whole world. Chrysostom seems to explain this expression better than all other commentators. The expression “near at the doors” has no subject in Matthew and Mark but in Luke – “near is the Kingdom of God.” One can take ἐγγύς in Matthew and Mark as masculine and translate: He that is the Messiah is near; but one can also translate as in the Russian text. In the latter case the expression should mean the speedy arrival of the predicted events.

Matthew 24:34. Truly I say to you: this generation will not pass away before all these things take place; (Cf. Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32.) Chrysostom says that the Savior “here speaks not of the generation then living but of the faithful. Generation is designated not only by time but by the manner of religion and life as for example when it is said: “this generation is seeking the Lord” (Ps 23:6).” Prov 21:11-14; Jer 8:3. Jerome understood the expression “this generation” in two ways: aut omne genus hominum significat aut specialiter Judaeorum (means either all the human race or specifically the Jews).

Matthew 24:35. Heaven and earth will pass away but My words will not pass away. (Cf. Mark 13:31; Luke 21:33.) In Mark and Luke the expressions are literally the same. In Matthew there are slight deviations (παρελεύσεται is agreed with γῆ and παρέλθωσαν). Similar words were spoken about the Old Testament law (Matt 5:17; Luke 16:17). Now the Savior speaks about His own words. We cannot judge what fulfillment this saying will receive in the future. But that Christ’s words have not “passed away” until the present time this is testified by history. On this basis one should think that they will not pass away in the future.

Matthew 24:36. But concerning that day and hour no one knows not even the angels of heaven but only My Father; (Cf. Mark 13:32.) In the Russian translation the words of Mark contain: “nor the Son”; but in Matthew these words are omitted. Most exegetes especially the earliest consider that the expression “nor the Son” was authentic also in Matthew and they referred the ignorance of the Son to His humanity not to His Divinity. Some explained Christ’s ignorance by His humility. All that He heard from the Father He told to His disciples (John 15:15) but what the Father kept in His power was not known to Him in the state of His humiliated humanity.

Matthew 24:37. But as it was in the days of Noah so will it be in the coming of the Son of Man: Literally: “but as the days of Noah so will it be” and so forth. In Matthew are omitted the words of Luke (Luke 21:34-36). The parallel in Luke here is Luke 17:26 – words spoken in a different context. The history of the flood to which the Savior here refers is well known. Before the great catastrophe people conducted themselves as in ordinary times. So will it be at the time of the second coming.

Matthew 24:38. For in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking marrying and giving in marriage until the day Noah entered the ark, Matthew 24:39. and they did not understand until the flood came and destroyed them all – so it will be also in the coming of the Son of Man; Cf. Luke 17:27. The references however are general to Gen 6:5, Gen 6:11-13, Gen 7:7.

Matthew 24:40. Then two will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. Matthew 24:41. Two women will be grinding grain; one will be taken and the other left. Cf. Luke 17:34 where there is additional thought to what is said in Matthew in the given verses. Matthew omits Luke 17:34 and Luke omits Matt 24:40. Very interesting is the transition from “the days of Noah” to what is said in the verses under consideration. As the flood came suddenly at a time when people did not expect it did not think about it and were careless so the coming of the Son of Man will be. But during the flood the destruction was general; all people perished except Noah and his family. At the second coming there will be something different: one from the field will be taken the other left. The same in verse 41. In verse 40 reference is made to two men in verse 41 – to two women. “Two grinding grain” – the translation is imprecise because in the original “grain” is in singular (ἐν τῷ μύλῳ) and therefore is incomprehensible. What are women grinding grain? In some manuscripts ἐν τῷ μύλωνι – at the mill (in pistrino). This reading is not considered correct. The correct reading ἐν τῷ μύλῳ means “grain” and thus the expression means: “two (women) grinding grain” (dativus instumenti with ἐν; see Blass Gram. S. 114). The custom of women grinding is mentioned in Exod 11:5; Isa 47:2. The meaning of the expressions of the verses under consideration is apparently that out of two men in the field and two women grinding two are saved and two are delivered to destruction.

Matthew 24:42. Therefore keep watch for you do not know on what day your Lord will come. (Cf. Mark 13:33.) “On what day” (ποίᾳ ἡμέρᾳ) in the Russian is replaced by “what hour” (ποίᾳ ὥρᾳ) but the latter reading is to be considered more probable. The verse is a proper and logical conclusion from what was just said where the discourse was about the unexpectedness of the parusia. This conclusion has a practical character and is an exhortation to watchfulness. The order and flow of thoughts is entirely natural and becomes even more natural when considering the further discourse. Therefore in vain it is remarked that in Christ’s discourse as set forth in Matthew there is “confusion” and here a clear basis is found for interpolation.

Matthew 24:43. But you know this, that if the master of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have been awake and would not have allowed his house to be robbed. (Compare Luke 12:39 – in a different context.) Both in Russian and in the Vulgate, the translation ‘would have been awake’ (vigilaret) is imprecise. In the original, the aorist ἐγρηγόρησεν ἄν means ‘would have awakened.’ A similar thought is expressed in other places of the New Testament (2 Pet 3:10; 1 Thess 5:2; Rev 3:3).

Matthew 24:44. Therefore, you also be ready, for in the hour you do not think, the Son of Man will come. Compare Luke 12:40 – almost literally similar, with rearrangement, except ὅτι ᾗ ού δοκεῖτε ὥρᾳ becomes ὅτι ᾗ ὥρᾳ οὐ δοκεῖτε, and with omission of the initial di toato. The preceding example (verse 43) points to a hypothetical case of ordinary theft and robbery, about which the master of the house ordinarily would not know in advance. In the verse being examined, the hypothetical speech changes into a positive one, and its meaning is this: do not be like the master of the house, who does not know when the thief will come to him. You also do not know when the Son of Man will come, but always be awake, because this may always and unexpectedly happen.

Matthew 24:45. Who, then, is the faithful and wise servant, whom his master set over his servants, to give them food at the proper time? (Compare Luke 12:42 – with some changes.) Matthew uses δοῦλος – ‘servant,’ while Luke uses οἰκονόμος – an overseer (in the Russian translation – ‘steward’). The latter expression may be more precise, but it appears only in Luke (Luke 12:42), not in the other evangelists. There is no difference in meaning, because overseers were ordinarily chosen from among servants. The expression applies not only to the disciples (which is especially evident from the further speech in chapter 25), and it is not said that they alone must conduct themselves properly, be faithful and wise servants, but to all people in general. Τίς here is not εἴ τις. The question serves as a continuation and, so to speak, a detailed explanation of the preceding speech.

Matthew 24:46. Blessed is that servant whom his master, when he comes, will find doing so— (Compare Luke 12:43). “So,” that is, rightly, conscientiously, and timely giving food to the servants—to other people who serve the same master. It can be understood both literally and spiritually. There is indication of the duty of honest and conscientious treatment of people, because the master may return unexpectedly and punish the worthless servant. That servant, set as chief over other servants, who conducts himself conscientiously with them, is blessed (μακάριος).

Matthew 24:47. Truly I say to you, he will set him over all his possessions. Compare Luke 12:44 – with only the replacement of ἀμήν by the word ἀληθῶς. The servant’s authority was previously limited, although he had been set as chief. But if the master sees that the servant has faithfully fulfilled his duties entrusted to him, then he will expand his authority, make him chief and manager not only of the servants but of all his property.

Matthew 24:48. But if that servant is evil and says in his heart, ‘My master is not coming soon,’ Matthew 24:49. and begins to beat his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards— (Compare Luke 12:45, with difference in expressions.) In verses 47 and 48–49 the same servant is clearly depicted, set as chief and manager of the other servants. He can conduct himself well or badly. First the first case is examined (verses 46–47), and then the second (verses 48–49). Even a good and faithful servant, despairing that his master will return soon, may change his former good conduct. The vices depicted by Christ were well known in Palestine. Drunkenness is mentioned more than thirty times in the Old Testament. It was strongly condemned by the prophets (Isa 28:1 and others). The images in Christ’s speech are borrowed directly from life and are distinguished by vivid colors. Everyone would agree that as He speaks, such things happen even now.

Matthew 24:50. the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect, and at an hour he does not know, (Compare Luke 12:46.) The thought is the same as was developed in the preceding speech – about the unexpectedness of Christ’s second coming, about the necessity of constant watchfulness and expectation and corresponding conduct.

Matthew 24:51. and will cut him in two and assign him the fate of the hypocrites; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Compare Luke 12:46 – instead of ‘with hypocrites’ Luke has ‘with the faithless.’ The final sentence ‘there will be... teeth’ is absent in Luke. Otherwise it is literal similarity. The word ‘cut’ in figurative sense here means ‘punish severely’ (literally διχοτομέω means ‘to cut,’ ‘to divide in two’). That διχοτομέω here should be understood not in a literal sense and that the evil servant will not be killed is evident from the following words, where it is said of his ‘fate’ together ‘with hypocrites.’ The word ‘fate’ immediately, as it were, transforms into a place of torment and then it is said that there will be ‘weeping and gnashing of teeth’ (for explanation of this expression, see the commentaries to Matt 8:12). Concerning cutting, compare Dan 2:5; Heb 4:12.