Does Matthew 25:31-46 teach salvation by works since Jesus is talking with the judgment day as judging people based on what they did? In order to answer the question we must first look at the section of Scripture.
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone,” (Matt. 24:36).
“But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone,” (Mark 13:32).
(Matt. 24:36), “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.”
(Mark 13:30-32), “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. 31″Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away. 32But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone,”
Problem: Jesus said, “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place” (Mt. 24:34). If Jesus is referring to his hearers (“this generation”), then he falsely predicted his second coming to their lifetimes. Preterist interpreters argue that this passage supports the notion that Jesus made a secret coming in AD 70 at the destruction of the Jewish temple. For instance, Preterist Gary DeMar states,
Notice how many times Jesus uses the word you (second person plural) in Matthew 24 and in the parallel passages in Mark 13 and Luke 21… Now, if you heard Jesus say that all these things would happen to ‘this generation,’ and in every other instance of its use ‘this generation’ meant the present generation, and you also heard Him speak of when ‘you’ see these things, what would you conclude?[1]
Is this the case?
Problem: Jesus spoke of signs and wonders regarding His second coming. But Jesus said “this generation” would not end before all these events took place. Did this mean that these events would occur in the lifetime of His hearers?
Problem: Jesus said, “He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other” (Mt. 24:31). Preterists claim that this isn’t a literal gathering. Instead, it is referring to a symbolic protection of God’s people in the Jewish War of AD 70. Is this the case?
Continue reading →
Problem: Jesus says, “Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the SON OF MAN COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF THE SKY with power and great glory” (Mt. 24:30). Futurists claim that Jesus will return literally on the clouds. However, Preterists claim that we shouldn’t press the words too literally. In the OT, clouds are often a symbol for God’s judgment—not a literal appearing (Ps. 104:3; Isa. 19:1).
Problem: In Matthew, Jesus represents His coming as “immediately after” (24:29) the Great Tribulation. But Luke seems to separate it by the “times of the Gentiles” (Luke 21:24, 27).
Problem: Jesus says, “So if they say to you, ‘Behold, He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out, or, ‘Behold, He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe them. 27 For just as the lightning comes from the east and flashes even to the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be” (Mt. 24:26-27). Preterists argue that lightning is a symbol of God’s presence or judgment in the OT. Therefore, it is possible that Jesus could have made a figurative “coming” in judgment through the Roman Empire in AD 70. That is, he “appeared” in a non-literal way. Preterist Gary DeMar writes, “In the Bible, lightning often signifies the presence of the Lord or His coming in judgment (Exod. 19:16; 20:18; Job 36:30; Ezek. 21:15, 28; Zech. 9:14).”[1] Is this the case?
Problem: Jesus says, “Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short” (Mt. 24:22). Preterist interpreters claim that this is a use of hyperbole. Really, Jesus simply meant that many people would’ve died without divine intervention. Is this the case?
Problem: Jesus said, “Therefore when you see the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)” (Mt. 24:15). Preterists claim that this occurred in AD 70, when the Roman military destroyed the Temple. Preterist Gary DeMar writes, “The Roman abomination hypothesis is the most popular since it parallels the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes.”[1] Likewise, Preterist Kenneth Gentry argues that it could have either been murderous zealots or the burning of the Temple by the Romans.[2] Is this the case?
Problem: Jesus said, “This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come” (Mt. 24:14). Preterists claim that the term “whole world” refers to the Roman Empire—not the entire globe. They reason that the NT authors use this expression in this way (Rom. 1:8; 10:18; 16:19; Col. 1:6, 23; Lk. 2:1). While the entire globe hasn’t been reached with the gospel, the NT authors used hyperbolic language to claim that the Roman Empire did heard about Christ. Is this a reasonable interpretation of this passage?
Problem: Jesus said, “But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved” (Mt. 24:13). Does this mean that perseverance is necessary for salvation?
Problem: Futurist interpreters claim that Luke is the only author of the Synoptics to mention the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. Matthew and Mark omit this from their accounts of the Olivet Discourse, and they instead mention the destruction of the Third Temple at the end of human history. Isn’t this needlessly confusing?
Problem: After he ridicules the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, Jesus says, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. 38 Behold, your house is being left to you desolate! 39 For I say to you, from now on you will not see Me until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’” (Mt. 23:37-39) Preterists argue that the “you” in this passage is clearly referring to his contemporary audience. If this is the case, then wouldn’t all of the Olivet Discourse be referring to Jesus’ original audience, too?