Due to technical difficulties we do not have audio this week. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Jesus’ reply in the remainder of the chapter 24 is to distinguish this eschatological event from the destruction of the temple.

It seems likely that Jesus tries to make them realize that a continuation without the temple until the ‘close of the age’ is possible.

The fulfillment of Daniel’s prophecy of the “abomination that causes desolation” is linked by many to the altar of burnt offering in the temple of Jerusalem by a representative of Antiochus IV, Epiphanes, in 167 B.C. (1 Macc 1:54–59; 6:7).

The fact that Jesus uses the same expression here makes it clear that its fulfillment was not restricted to the events of the time of the Maccabees.

What it does refer to has been hotly debated. Those who hold the view that all the events described in Mk 13:5–23 have to do with the Fall of Jerusalem most often identify the “abomination” with either the Roman army ( Luke 21:20), and in particular the military standards that the Jews considered idolatrous and an abomination, or with the Zealots, or more specifically Phannias, whom they farcically made high priest (cf. Jos. War IV, 147–57 [iii.6–8]).

Others see this prophecy as being fulfilled in the end time by the Antichrist.

Mark 13:14But when ye see the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not (let him that readeth understand), then let them that are in Judaea flee unto the mountains:

2. Paul’s statements in 2 Thessalonians 2:3–10 about the eschatological Antichrist seem to be derived from a similar tradition.

3. The person referred to must be associated with the End, because in Matthew’s Gospel his appearance is immediately followed by the coming of the Son of Man (cf. Mt 24:29–30).

A solution, is to understand the abomination that causes desolation as having a multiple fulfillment in (1) the Maccabean period, (2) the events of A.D. 66–70, and (3) the end time.

Luke 21:20But when ye see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that her desolation is at hand.

Mark’s language is less explicit: “standing where it does not belong” (Mark 13:14), instead of “standing in the holy place.” Luke resolves the matter: “When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near”, but now there is no explicit mention of “the abomination of desolation.”

Luke, writing for a Gentile audience less concerned with Daniel, emphasizes the aspect of warning. Matthew, believing the allusions to Daniel important for his Jewish audience because Jesus drew attention to them, makes explicit reference to “the abomination of desolation” and to “the holy place,” since the setting up of the abomination in the holy place is the inevitable result of the pagan attack.

Many commentators hold that Matthew (but probably not Mark and certainly not Luke) here portrays not just the Fall of Jerusalem but also the Great tribulation before Antichrist comes , but it seems the details in vv. 16–21 seem to be too limited geographically and culturally to justify that view.

The instructions Jesus gives his disciples about what to do in view of Mt 24:15 are so specific that they must be related to the Jewish War. The devastation would stretch far beyond the city; people throughout Judea should flee to the mountains, where the Maccabeans had hidden in caves

The burden of the first section of the Olivet Discourse, then, is that this entire age is to be characterized by distress, persecution, witness, opposition, wars, famines, and assorted false Christs whose purpose is to deceive God’s people.

This Generation

Generation has been taken to mean ‘the Jewish race’, or ‘unbelieving Judaism’.

v. The unexpected parousia of the Son of man (24:36–25:13
24:29–35. These verses are often understood as referring to the parousia, and thus as moving to the second part of the disciples’ question. But immediately after does not leave room for a long delay, nor does the explicit time-scale given in v 34. The word parousia does not occur in this section but is prominently reintroduced in the new paragraph which begins at v 36, where its unknown time is contrasted with the clear statement that the events of this paragraph will take place within this generation. –

Rev 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and one said, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. 2And the court which is without the temple leave without, and measure it not; for it hath been given unto the nations: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. 3And I will give unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth

42 Months

Now we come to the first reference of 42 months. This crops up several times in chapters 12–14, we need to stop and think about it. Forty-two months on an idealized month of 30 days is the same thing as 1,260 days, so it comes up pretty often … 1,260 days or 42 months or three and a half years. It’s all the same thing. Also time, times, and half a time.
So 1,260 days, 42 months, three and a half years, and time, times, and half a time are all the same time. The question is, What do they mean?

Is this an exact historical referent? There are some people who think it is, that this is a measure of three and a half years during which certain things will take place. But, we have seen already that numbers are used symbolically again and again and again in the book of Revelation. Time is sometimes schematized.

So one asks oneself, to a first-century Jewish Christian, to someone who’s steeped in this kind of literature, who knows Jewish history, whether Jewish or Christian, what would spring to mind with the three and a half years mixed out in judgment and so on?

There appears to be a solid answer to that. In fact, the dominant interpretation in many periods of history has been this one.

Do you know how in certain periods of history something stands out in just about everyone’s mind? For example, for those of you who were, let’s say, 15 and older in 1963, can you remember where you were when you heard that President Kennedy was shot? It was a defining moment.

You just say, “November ‘63, Dallas.” You don’t have to say any more than that, and all of the emotions of the time come back

For an American citizen, “Fourscore years and seven,” what do you think of?
you think of Lincoln, Gettysburg Address, Civil War

So when you refer to certain events in a people’s history, they may be very significant to them, but they may not be significant elsewhere, and it’s important to try to get inside their frame of reference, to try to make sense of it all. In Jewish history, one of the defining moments is the Maccabean Revolt.

Antiochus IV Epiphanes, came to power in the north at a time when Palestine was under Seleucid control.

He made it a capital offense to observe any Jewish religious rite. He made it a capital offense, for example, to observe the Sabbath. He made it a capital offense to go up to the temple on Yom Kippur. In fact, what he did was bring in his troops and sacrifice pigs, which were unclean, on the altar and dedicate the whole thing to a pagan god. This was a time of savagery and butchery.

The date was 167 BC. This lead to the Maccabean Revolt. The whole thing was over by 164. They won. They rededicated the temple. Antiochus IV Epiphanes was beaten, and that was the end of the Seleucid rule over this whole area. The whole thing lasted three and a half years, and it was a defining moment for the Jews. It’s still a defining moment for the Jews.

You ask any Jew, no matter how secular he is, to tell you about the Maccabean Revolt, and he’ll tell you about it. It is part of the self-identity of the Jews and was so even more in the first century. It was so much closer. So it came to be identified with a period of extreme suffering that would only last for a period of time and then it stopped.

Remember what Jesus said in the Olivet Discourse. “For the sake of the elect those days will be stopped.” Instead of going to a full number, you cut it off at three and a half. It came to be a useful symbol in a whole lot of ways. I think that’s what is picked up. I think in every instance of the 42 months or three and a half years or time, times, and half a time or 1,260 days …

It appears that in every instance where it shows up in the book of Revelation, that is the background reality that now serves as a symbol for a period of time of terrible suffering, which is finally brought to an end.

We’ll see that again in the next two or three chapters.

The Two Witnesses

Now we come to the two witnesses who are then introduced. Again, let me be the first to acknowledge that there are many different points of view on this matter, but let me give you some hints.

“I will give power to my two witnesses. They will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.” We’ll skip the olive trees and the lampstand a moment. “If anyone tries to harm them, fire comes out of their mouth.”

They have a certain kind of prophetic power.

Then when they’ve finished their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss attacks them, and they’re killed. They’re martyred. Now note whatever this city is that is called “Sodom and Egypt, where also the Lord was crucified” , for three and a half days, people from every tongue, tribe, language, and nation gaze on them.

If you take that text seriously, there’s no way that took place in the first century or in any other century. There are no two witnesses and no city where you get people from every tongue and tribe and people and nation looking on these people, all coming by in a period of three and a half days.

If on the other hand you do see that these witnesses represent the witness martyr community (that part of the people of God who, in fact, die for their faith), then there is a sense in which when they die people from every tongue and tribe and nation gaze on them in scorn. It has happened again and again and again.

That only makes sense if the two witnesses are symbols for more than just two who happen to die in a particular city at a particular time. When they come back to life again, they’re escorted to heaven. It does not make sense to say that this all happens in AD 70. I don’t think it makes sense either simply to assign it to some unforeseen event in the future when a real Moses and a real Elijah come back.

Are these chaps going to come back, now not in a resurrection body but in an ordinary body, preach for a prescribed period of time, get bumped off again, and then come back to life? Is the temple going to be rebuilt when the whole of New Testament theology argues that it points to Christ and the sacrifices of the temple are fulfilled in him?

Are you now going to rebuild it and say, “Well, now they look backward to the way before they look forward”? It misunderstands all of the book of Hebrews. It misunderstands the thrust of New Testament theology. Christ our Lamb has been sacrificed for us. He’s our Passover. I think that misunderstands the nature of apocalyptic and misunderstands the nature of New Testament theology and misunderstands John. It doesn’t handle the language properly.

But if you fit it into a broader scheme in which in every tongue, tribe, and nation you get Christian witnesses who get bumped off and people gloat but then at the end they are brought back to life, who has the last say? Now they give glory to God, but it’s a bit late. It reminds you of Philippians, chapter 2. “Every knee shall bow.” In other words, I think what you have again in this passage is a Christian way of looking at things under highly symbolic categories.

We need to work through some of the symbols and see if this makes sense. “They will prophesy for 1,260 days.” 42 months, three and a half years. If this is another way of referring to sustained tribulation that does take place between the first advent and the second advent,

It’s not, then, that these two individuals live for the whole period of church history. It’s that these two witnesses come and bear witness to the gospel, to the truth, to Jesus. Look at how they’re described. Clearly, they are modeled in certain respects after Moses and Elijah. Shutting up the rain, for example, reminds you of Elijah. Consuming enemies with fire (2 Kings 1). Like Moses they turn water into blood (Exodus 7). They smite the earth with plagues (Exodus 8).

That there are two witnesses in this view may stem from the well-known law in Deuteronomy 19, which requires a minimum of two witnesses for something to be true. They’re bearing witness to the truth. The period of their ministry, then, this 42 months, 1,260 days, and so on is exactly the same period as the trampling of the city, that’s significant?

While part of the city is being trampled, they continue to bear witness. Do we see the point? There is persecution, and the church witnesses. The whole church doesn’t die. Part of the city is trampled. Part of the temple place is trampled, and there is prophecy. As long as they are prophesying, as long as God gives them this, they prophesy, and they may actually call judgment down.