Matthew 24:34

[jzeron]

What is the Church’s position on Matthew 24:34? I mean, here Jesus prophesies that he will come before the end of the generation. And it is obvious that he is talking about his actual second coming from the passage right before.

It bothers me. It seems like it could be a very problematic verse.

Thank you.

Jose

 

[karebear92]

What is the Church’s position on Matthew 24:34? I mean, here Jesus prophesies that he will come before the end of the generation. And it is obvious that he is talking about his actual second coming from the passage right before.

It bothers me. It seems like it could be a very problematic verse.

Thank you.

Jose

From my Ignatius Catholic Study Bible:
“24:34 this generation: The expression in Greek can mean “this race” or “these contemporaries of mine”. The latter meaning best fits this context, not only because Jesus envisions his initial coming within the lifetime of his first disciples (16:28), but also because he often addresses his unbelieving contemporaries with the same term (11:16), either contrasting them with an earlier generation that responded to God’s message (12:4142) or implicitly comparing them with the faithless generation of Israel that failed to enter the Promised Land (12:39, 45; 16:4; 17:17; cf. Deut 1:35; 32:5).”

 

[CatholicRoots]

If you look how the discourse proceeds though you will see that Jesus goes on to say that ‘no man know the hour’. Also many verses preceding it show that he was not refering to an imminent return, for instance :

“And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the WHOLE world as a testimony to all nations, and THEN the end will come.” (Matthew 24:14) So it will not end until the word has been preached to all nations, which Jesus later commissions in the ‘Great Comission’ (Mat 28)

“Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me." (Matthew 24:9) This verse implies that followers of him will die or be persecuted, so how can it possibily be imminent enough for them to be alive, if they have to die?

 

[Ben_F]

I believe He was talking about His future transfiguration. God bless:thumbsup:

 

[bmullins]

I believe He was talking about His future transfiguration. God bless:thumbsup:

There are also others who indicate that many of the signs that Jesus was talking about were fulfilled when the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. It can also be pointing to the end of time. (It doesn’t have to be just one or the other, but can be both.) The Haydock commentary on the chapter is very well written on the section.

This generation; i.e. the nation of the Jews shall not cease to exist, until all these things shall be accomplished: thus we see the nation of the Jews still continue, and will certainly continue to the end of the world. T. — Then the cross, which has been a scandal to the Jew, and a stumbling-block to the Gentile, shall appear in the heavens, for the consolation of the good Christian. Hoc signum crucis erit in cœlo, cum Dominus ad judicandum venerit. — If it be to be understood of the destruction of Jerusalem, the sense may be, this race of men now living; if of the last day of judgment, this generation of the faithful, saith Theophylactus,[4] shall be continued: i.e. the Church of Christ, to the end of the world. Wi. — This race, I tell you in very truth, shall not pass away till all this be finally accomplished in the ruin of Jerusalem, the most express figure of the destruction and end of the world. V. — By generation, our Saviour does not mean the people that were in existence at that time, but the faithful of his Church; thus says the psalmist: this is the generation of them that seek the Lord. Ps. xxiii, v. 6. S. Chrys. hom. lxxvii.

 

[thistle]

What is the Church’s position on Matthew 24:34? I mean, here Jesus prophesies that he will come before the end of the generation. And it is obvious that he is talking about his actual second coming from the passage right before.

It bothers me. It seems like it could be a very problematic verse.

Thank you.

Jose

D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 34. This generation; i.e. the nation of the Jews shall not cease to exist, until all these things shall be accomplished: thus we see the nation of the Jews still continue, and will certainly continue to the end of the world. (Tirinus) — Then the cross, which has been a scandal to the Jew, and a stumbling-block to the Gentile, shall appear in the heavens, for the consolation of the good Christian. Hoc signum crucis erit in cœlo, cum Dominus ad judicandum venerit. — If it be to be understood of the destruction of Jerusalem, the sense may be, this race of men now living; if of the last day of judgment, this generation of the faithful, saith Theophylactus,[4] shall be continued: i.e. the Church of Christ, to the end of the world. (Witham) — This race, I tell you in very truth, shall not pass away till all this be finally accomplished in the ruin of Jerusalem, the most express figure of the destruction and end of the world. (Bible de Vence) — By generation, our Saviour does not mean the people that were in existence at that time, but the faithful of his Church; thus says the psalmist: this is the generation of them that seek the Lord. (Psalm xxiii, ver. 6.) (St. Chrysostom, hom. lxxvii.)

 

[TimothyH]

Much of what Jesus speaks about in that sequence is taken from the Old Testament. To properly understand this entire passage, we have to have a proper understanding of the Old Testament, especially the prophets.

For example, his use of the imagery of the sun being darkened and the moon giving no light in verse 29…

***“Immediately after the tribulation of those days,
the sun will be darkened,
and the moon will not give its light,
and the stars will fall from the sky,
and the powers of the heavens will be shaken." *(Matthew 24:29)

Is a direct reference to the following passage in Isaiah 13

The stars of the heavens and their constellations
will send forth no light;
The sun will be dark at its rising,
and the moon will not give its light.h
Thus I will punish the world for its evil
and the wicked for their guilt.
I will put an end to the pride of the arrogant,
the insolence of tyrants I will humble.
I will make mortals more rare than pure gold,
human beings, than the gold of Ophir.
For this I will make the heavens tremble
and the earth shall be shaken from its place,
At the wrath of the LORD of hosts
on the day of his burning anger.
(Isaiah 13:10-13)

Isaiah is actually divided into two books. The first half of Isaiah was called the Book of Woes. “Woe” was always a passing of judgement. Jesus is quoting from the first half of Isaiah - the book of woes - and is passing judgement on the generation of Israelites who worshipped God externally but did not treat their fellow man with love and compassion. Jesus condemns this generation all through Matthew’s Gospel.

You can see where John the Baptist is the first prophet to quote from the second book of Isaiah which was known as the Book of Consolations. No other prophet or teacher had done that. John the Baptist quoted the first verses of the Book of Consolation, “A voice of one crying in the wilderness, make straight the way of the Lord.” (cf Isaiah 40:3)
The second half

Jesus passes judgement and condmns this generation at times and does so by quoting from the Book of Woes and at times he proclaims release from captivity and freedom from slavery by quoting from the Book of Consolations.

This is just a small example of how we can’t interperet anything Jesus says in the absence of a good understanding of the Old Testament.

-Tim-

 

[DavidPalm]

There are also others who indicate that many of the signs that Jesus was talking about were fulfilled when the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. It can also be pointing to the end of time. (It doesn’t have to be just one or the other, but can be both.) The Haydock commentary on the chapter is very well written on the section.

I wrote my Master’s thesis on the Olivet Discourse at a Protestant seminary and I argued exactly this, that everything that preceded our Lord’s statement in Matt 24:34 was indeed fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70. This includes such imagery as the stars falling and the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven. As TimothyH points out, there are a number of Old Testament parallels to such language that describe not the end of the world, but of God’s judgments of nations within history.

I found that this view is supported by such Doctors of the Church as Sts. Augustine and Thomas, so it’s a good, solid Catholic position.

 

[TimothyH]

I wrote my Master’s thesis on the Olivet Discourse at a Protestant seminary and I argued exactly this, that everything that preceded our Lord’s statement in Matt 24:34 was indeed fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70. This includes such imagery as the stars falling and the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven. As TimothyH points out, there are a number of Old Testament parallels to such language that describe not the end of the world, but of God’s judgments of nations within history.

I found that this view is supported by such Doctors of the Church as Sts. Augustine and Thomas, so it’s a good, solid Catholic position.

I’d pay for a copy of that thesis.

David, I’m wondering if you could comment on what I recall, I don’t know what the source was, that the veil or curtain in the temple was painted with a rendering of the heavens - stars and sun and moon? I wonder sometimes if the reference to the the sky being rolled up in Revelation 6 was not the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy that the stars will fall from the sky, moon will not give light, etc.

When he opened the sixth seal, I looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon became like blood, and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale; the sky vanished like a scroll that is rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. (Revelation 6:12-14)

I wish I knew the source of the information that the veil was painted thus. I even remember a rendering of what the veil would have looked like painted with the night sky on it. The source stated, if I remember correctly, that the Romans may have rolled up the curtain and took it as a souvenir when they destroyed the temple in 70 AD, hence John’s reference to the sky rolled up like a scroll.

Any help with this would be appreciated.

-Tim-

 

[bmullins]

I’d pay for a copy of that thesis.

David, I’m wondering if you could comment on what I recall, I don’t know what the source was, that the veil or curtain in the temple was painted with a rendering of the heavens - stars and sun and moon?
.
.
.

Any help with this would be appreciated.

-Tim-

Josephus.

before these doors there was a veil of equal largeness with the doors. It was a Babylonian curtain, embroidered with blue, and fine linen, and scarlet, and purple, and of a contexture that was truly wonderful. Nor was this mixture of colors without its mystical interpretation, but was a kind of image of the universe; for by the scarlet there seemed to be enigmatically signified fire, by the fine flax the earth, by the blue the air, and by the purple the sea; two of them having their colors the foundation of this resemblance; but the fine flax and the purple have their own origin for that foundation, the earth producing the one, and the sea the other. This curtain had also embroidered upon it all that was mystical in the heavens, excepting that of the [twelve] signs, representing living creatures. (Wars 5.5.4)

 

[jzeron]

Thank you for all your responses.

 

[TimothyH]

Josephus.

Wow. Thank you!

-Tim-

 

[DavidPalm]

Josephus.

There’s more from Josephus too. Starting with the Tabernacle and extending into the building of the Temple, these were seen as microcosms of the Universe:

When Moses distinguished the tabernacle into three parts, (15) and allowed two of them to the priests, as a place accessible and common, he denoted the land and the sea, these being of general access to all; but he set apart the third division for God, because heaven is inaccessible to men. And when he ordered twelve loaves to be set on the table, he denoted the year, as distinguished into so many months. By branching out the candlestick into seventy parts, he secretly intimated the Decani, or seventy divisions of the planets; and as to the seven lamps upon the candlesticks, they referred to the course of the planets, of which that is the number. The veils, too, which were composed of four things, they declared the four elements; for the fine linen was proper to signify the earth, because the flax grows out of the earth; the purple signified the sea, because that color is dyed by the blood of a sea shell-fish; the blue is fit to signify the air; and the scarlet will naturally be an indication of fire. Now the vestment of the high priest being made of linen, signified the earth; the blue denoted the sky, being like lightning in its pomegranates, and in the noise of the bells resembling thunder. And for the ephod, it showed that God had made the universe of four elements; and as for the gold interwoven, I suppose it related to the splendor by which all things are enlightened. He also appointed the breastplate to be placed in the middle of the ephod, to resemble the earth, for that has the very middle place of the world. And the girdle which encompassed the high priest round, signified the ocean, for that goes round about and includes the universe. Each of the sardonyxes declares to us the sun and the moon; those, I mean, that were in the nature of buttons on the high priest’s shoulders. And for the twelve stones, whether we understand by them the months, or whether we understand the like number of the signs of that circle which the Greeks call the Zodiac, we shall not be mistaken in their meaning. And for the mitre, which was of a blue color, it seems to me to mean heaven; for how otherwise could the name of God be inscribed upon it?

The Temple, of course, shared many of these same architectural details as the Tabernacle. And J. D. Levenson points out other details in the Scripture that indicate that Solomon’s Temple too was a microcosm of the Universe:

1. The construction of the Solomonic Temple in Jerusalem takes seven years to complete (1 Kings 6:38). In Lev. 25:3-7, the seventh year is called a Sabbath, thus forming a connection between the seven days of the week and the seven years of, in the case of Leviticus, agricultural labor, but in the case of 1 Kings, architectural labor.
2. The Temple dedication occurs during the Feast of Tabernacles, which was a seven day festival (Deut. 16:13) which fell on the seventh month of the year (1 Kings 8:2)
3. Solomon’s speech during the Temple’s dedication included seven petitions (1 Kings 8:31-53).
4. The concept of měnûḥāh also links the Temple with creation. Rest occurs at the completion of each project (Psalm 132:13-14—associates the experience of the Temple with rest). In fact, 1 Chron. 22:9 claims that the reason Solomon and not David was instructed to build the Temple was because Solomon was a “man of rest” (’îš měnûḥāh) and of peace (šlm) as his name (šlmh) implies. (see Levenson, Sinai and Zion, 133-135, 140-145; Levenson, “Temple and the World,” 283-284; cited from J. Morrow, “Creation as Temple-Building and Work as Liturgy in Genesis 1-3”)

It is no wonder, then, that when our Lord spoke of the Temple being destroyed, the disciples automatically assumed it meant the end of all things. It’s easy to see how from an ancient Jewish mindset the destruction of the Temple could be described using apocalyptic language that seems to describe the destruction of the Universe.

TimothyH, I am in the (very slow) process of transliterating the Greek and Hebrew citations in my thesis, so that I can eventually post it on the Web. But if you PM me I can send you an electronic copy with things as they currently stand.