CHAPTER XIV
SUCH AS NEVER WAS
It is needful that close attention be paid to the inspired words whereby
the distresses attendant upon the destruction of the Jewish nation and
their holy city are described in the several prophecies wherein they are
foretold. For it is quite a common mistake to assume that the great tribulation
was to be a calamity of unexampled magnitude as regards the number of
the slain, and the amount of property destroyed. Thus we have had it said
to us that the late world war exceeded the tribulation of the Jews during
and resulting from the siege of Jerusalem, in that more lives were lost,
more towns devastated, &c. But the Scriptures do not speak of it as
a calamity that should exceed all others in magnitude. In fact that could
not be, for there has been no calamity to compare in magnitude with that
of the flood, and will be none till the heavens and earth which now are
shall be destroyed by fire (#2Pe 3:6,7). The prophecies we are studying
speak not of a tribulation greater in magnitude or extent, but different
in kind; and moreover, they speak of one which was to come as a judgment
from God upon the Jewish nation. Thus, in Jeremiah 30:6 we read, "Alas!
for that day is great, so that none is like it; it is even the time of
Jacob’s trouble." Here are both of the limitations to which
we have referred. The first is in the words "none like it, "
which suggest troubles of a peculiar sort; and the second is in the words
"Jacob’s trouble." The words of Daniel 12:1 are equally
explicit: "And there shall be a time of trouble such as never was
since there was a nation, ’"etc. The words "such as"
point to troubles of a special kind, and the words "since there was
a nation" mean a nation of Israel, as the context shows. Finally
our Lord’s words are "great tribulation such as was not since
the beginning of the world, " etc.; and again the context shows that
the calamity He spoke of was to come upon that generation of Israelites.
The peculiar character of those self-inflicted sufferings of the Jews
during the siege will be clearly seen from the extracts given below from
the history of Josephus; but there is also to be taken into consideration
the fact that, at the termination of the siege, the whole nation was sold
into bondage and scattered to the ends of the earth. Such a thing had
never happened before (though Jerusalem had been often besieged); and
the words of Christ make it sure that nothing like it will happen again.
The apostle Paul, who is the chief revelator of the second coming of Christ,
speaks definitely and frequently of "the wrath to come, " but
is absolutely silent as to any "great tribulation" in connection
with the second advent. Thus, he says explicitly that "it is a righteous
thing .with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; and
to you that are troubled, rest with us; when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed
from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on
them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus
Christ; who shall be punished with everlasting destruction .... When He
shall come to be glorified in His saints, and to be admired in all them
that believe .... in that day" (#2Th 1:6-10). This passage speaks
plainly of the vengeance that is to fall, when Christ comes again, upon
all who reject the gospel; but neither here nor elsewhere in the writings
of Paul is there any mention of a special period of tribulation (the last
of the seventy weeks of Daniel 9, as some say) preceding the revelation
of Jesus Christ. What Paul distinctly foretells in this passage, and refers
to in other passages (as #1Th 1:10 5:2,3) is in agreement with the words
of Christ, Who, speaking of the time of His coming again in glory with
His angels, said, "And then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn"
(#Mt 24:30,31).
We are aware that many in our day have so settled it in their minds that
the appearing of Christ in glory is to be preceded by a definite period,
"the great tribulation" so called, that it is difficult for
them even to consider the idea that the period to which our Lord applied
that expression is now long past. Nevertheless we are confident that all
who are disposed to examine with open minds the testimony of the Scriptures
will be constrained to agree with the conclusion we have reached, which
is that of practically all the great commentators of bygone days, and
of many in our own day. That view is well and concisely stated by Wiston
in his preface to Josephus’ Wars of the Jews, where he says:
“That these calamities of the Jews, who were our Saviour’s murderers,
were to be the greatest that had ever been since the beginning of the
world, our Saviour had directly foretold, (#Mt 24:21 Mr 13:19 Lu 21:23,24)
and that they proved to be such accordingly, Josephus is here a most authentic
witness.”
MARK’S ACCOUNT OF THE OLIVET PROPHECY
Let us now, with the help thus gained, examine more closely the entire
discourse. For this purpose we select the account given by Mark as the
basis of our study. This we do because it is the most concise and straightforward.
Since it gives the Lord’s answer to the same question of the four
disciples, we must assume that it is complete, in the sense of containing
everything said by the Lord that relates directly to that question. Additional
statements found in Matthew and Luke would be merely details, or matters
collateral to the main subject.
The question—put to the Lord privately by Peter, James, John and
Andrew (#Mr 13:3,4)—was this: "Tell us when shall these things
be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?"
The expression these things (or these events) is important for identification.
It meant the terrible overthrow which the Lord had just announced to them,
the completeness whereof was indicated by the fact that there should "not
be left one stone upon another that should not be thrown down" (#Mr
13:2). {a}
The Lord’s reply begins very significantly with the words, "Take
heed lest any man deceive you." These, and the words which follow
to the end of verse 8, seem to be not in response to the question put
to Him. But they are all the more important for that very reason; for
they show that what the Lord deemed most essential was to correct the
erroneous thought in their minds that the time of the happening of "these
things" was to be the time of His coming again in power and glory
to set up His visible Kingdom, whereof He had previously spoken to them
(#Mt 16:27; 19:28). He was therefore most explicit in warning them to
beware of false Christs, who would arise and deceive many at the time
of the siege of Jerusalem. Furthermore, He warned them not to be disturbed
by wars or rumours of wars, earthquakes, famines and the like; for such
things must occur, but they were not signs of "the end." Thus
the subject of His own coming again at the end of the age was introduced,
as we have said, in a purely negative way, and solely in order to inform
the disciples that His second coming was in no way connected with the
events whereof He was then forewarning them.
In this connection the Lord also informed them of the treatment they were
to receive, and the sufferings they were to endure (#Mr 13:9-13); and
He instructed them what they were to do when summoned before tribunals
for His Name’s sake (#Mr 13:11).
The one great thing they were to keep in mind in respect to the unmeasured
period that was to elapse before His coming again was that "the gospel
must first be published among all nations" (#Mr 13:10). In like manner
after His resurrection, when they brought up the same question concerning
the restoring of the kingdom to Israel, He turned their minds from that
subject, and said, "But .... ye shall be witnesses unto Me, both
in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost
part of the earth" (#Ac 1:6-8). The end of the age will come when,
and only when, the work of the Gospel shall have been finished. Thus He
made the work of the Gospel to be the matter of supreme importance.
This reply to their thoughts concerning His second coming is found (with
additional details) in (#Mt 24:4-14 Lu 21:8-19). We need not refer at
this point to those passages. For what we wish just now to impress upon
our readers is that the Lord was not, in this part of His reply, speaking
of events that were to happen just prior to His second advent, but on
the contrary, was warning them not to take such things as wars, famines,
pestilences, &c., as indications that His advent was near.
Obviously that warning applies throughout the entire age; for if commotions
of the sort mentioned by the Lord were not indications of the nearness
of His coming at the beginning of the age, they would not be indications
thereof at any later period.
The Sign. At this point (#Mr 13:14) the Lord changes the subject, as indicated
by the word "But"; and He now specifies a definite "sign"—impossible
to be misunderstood—whereby they and all the saints of that generation
should know with absolute certainty that the predicted "desolation"
was about to take place, He says: "But when ye shall see the abomination
of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought
not (let him that readeth understand), then let them that be in Judea
flee to the mountains, " etc.
We have already shown by the corresponding passage in Luke 21:20 that
"the abomination of desolation" was the invading army which
was about to encircle Jerusalem and accomplish "the desolation thereof."
That "abomination, " when it was encompassing Jerusalem, was
"standing where it ought not." A comparison of the two passages
leaves no room for any uncertainty as to the Lord’s meaning. What
has mainly caused certain modern expositors to go astray at this point
is a curious mistake in regard to the expression used by Matthew, "standing
in the holy place." This point is so important that we reserve it
for special comment later on. In view of the very general misunderstanding
concerning this particular point, the Lord’s words, "let him
that readeth understand, " are very significant.
In this part of the Lord’s answer (#Mr 13:14-23) He gave explicit
directions to His people how to secure their own safety; and furthermore
He indicated that the complete investment of the city would be so swiftly
accomplished that, after the appearance of the armies, their only safety
would lie in instant flight. We call attention once more to the exceedingly
practical character of this prophecy.
It is important to notice that the word "affliction" in verse
19 of Mark 13, is the same as that rendered "tribulation" in
verse 24, and in (#Mt 24:7,21.)
In verse 20 is the promise that "those days"—referring
to the horrors of the siege—would be shortened; and we have already
shown, in discussing Daniel 12, that the time was shortened, and in a
manner evidently providential, so that the Romans obtained sudden, and
most unexpected, possession of the last stronghold of the city.
At this point the Lord renews the warning against expecting His return
at that time. He speaks with great definiteness, saying, "Then, "
that is during those days of siege, "if any man shall say to you,
Lo, here is Christ; or lo, He is there; believe him not" (#Mr 13:21).
Moreover, He gives the reason for this explicit warning, saying, "For
false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall show signs and
wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect. But take ye heed:
behold, I have foretold you all things" (#Mr 13:22,23). These words
become very clear and plain when it is seen that the Lord is speaking
of false Christs, and false prophets, who would seduce (or deceive) many
into the belief that He was about to appear at that time and save Jerusalem
from the invading armies. Similarly in the days of Zedekiah, when the
city was besieged by Nebuchadnezzar, there were false prophets who deceived
the people by telling them that the enemy would not capture the city (#Jer
27:14, &c.). In view of the many interventions by the Lord on behalf
of His people, and of the many promises given to them, it was very easy
indeed to persuade the Jews to expect a miraculous deliverance. Hence
it was exceedingly important that Christ should make His own disciples
understand that there was to be no deliverance in this case.
In the corresponding part of Matthew’s Gospel (#Mt 24:15-28) it is
plain that we have another account of identically the same future events.
Mark says "in those days"—i, e., in the days of the siege
of Jerusalem—"shall be affliction (great tribulation), such
as was not from the beginning, " &c. Matthew says, "For
then shall be great tribulation, such as was not from the beginning, "
etc.
Verses 27 and 28 of Matthew 24 tell what will be the manner of the Lord’s
appearing when He does come ("as the lightning cometh out of the
east, " &c.). Those words are not in Mark. This further goes
to show that Christ’s second coming was not the main subject of His
discourse here, but was a collateral matter. Obviously in this place also
it was mentioned merely to give emphasis to the warning not to heed the
reports which would be current at that time, that He was "in the
desert, " or "in the secret chambers."
The corresponding part of Luke’s account is found in verses 20-24
(#Lu 21:20-24). This account is valuable mainly for the very definite
statements of verse 24, which tell how the siege was to end: "And
they"—the people of verse 23—"shall fall by the edge
of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations; and Jerusalem
shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles
be fulfilled." These few words give a concise and accurate description
of the conditions of the city and people down to the present day. They
made it plain to the disciples that there was to be no deliverance for
Jerusalem at that time.
It is particularly to be noted that Luke, having spoken in detail of a
coming destruction of Jerusalem, which everyone admits is that which came
to pass in A. D. 70, says not a word of any other tribulation after that
one. This forbids the idea that there is yet another tribulation (and
even a worse one) in store for the Jews. Their worst enemies could hardly
desire it, no reason for it can be conceived, the Scriptures do not reveal
it, and we should be very slow to believe that such a thing could be.
Here are three evangelists, selected by God for the special purpose, and
inspired by the Holy Spirit, each of whom gives us an account of one and
the same utterance of the Lord Jesus Christ. That utterance has mainly
to do with an affliction of unparalleled severity, which soon was to fall
upon Jerusalem and Judea, to the complete "desolation" of the
city and the extinction of the nation, but concerning the approach whereof
Christ’s own people were to receive a timely warning and an opportunity
to escape. If now it be indeed the case (as some modern expositors affirm)
that the affliction whereof Matthew and Mark have preserved a record was
not the nearby destruction of the city, but one that was not to happen
until the very end of this dispensation, and only after Israel had been
nationally exterminated, scattered for an entire age, and regathered in
their land and city again (of all which things, however, neither Matthew
nor Mark says a single word), how can we possibly account for the fact
that Luke, though he speaks most impressively of the nearby destruction
of Jerusalem by Titus, and of the world wide dispersion of the Jews, makes
no reference at all to that far worse tribulation which is the prominent
feature of the accounts given by Matthew and Mark as interpreted by certain
modern expositors? Manifestly that could not be. And on the other hand,
in view of the prominence given by Luke to the approaching destruction
of Jerusalem, and in view also of the identical instructions given to
the disciples, as recorded by all three evangelists, it is not supposable
that Matthew and Mark would absolutely ignore that unspeakable affliction,
and describe—in identically the same context—another tribulation
that lay in the far off future.
The statement found in (#Lu 21:22, )" For these be the days of vengeance,
that all things which are written may be fulfilled, " calls for attentive
consideration. The expression "the days of vengeance" indicates
a definite period of judgment; and this is emphasized by the words, "that
all things which are written, " which means, of course, all the threats
of judgment, recorded in the law and the prophets, "might be fulfilled."
Manifestly, if all things of that nature were "fulfilled" at
the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, then there could not be after
that a further (and a worse) tribulation for Israel.
As a help to the understanding of these words, let us turn to the earliest
prophecy which speaks of the days of vengeance that were to come upon
the faithless people. It is found in (#De 28:49-59, ) where God gave,
through Moses, an outline of the future history of His people, telling
how they would depart from Himself, and how He would punish them by bringing
against them a nation which should besiege them in their cities. The description
fits very accurately the Romans, and the desolations wrought by them.
We quote a part of the passage:
“The Lord shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end
of the earth, as swift as the eagle flieth; a nation whose tongue thou
shalt not understand; a nation of fierce countenance, which shall not
regard the person of the old, nor show favour to the young: *** And he
shall besiege thee in all thy gates, until thy high and fenced walls come
down, wherein thou trustedst. *** And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine
own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the Lord thy
God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straitness wherewith thine
enemies shall distress thee: So that the man that is tender among you
and very delicate, his eye shall be evil toward his brother, and toward
the wife of his bosom, and toward the remnant of his children which he
shall leave; so that he will not give to any of them of the flesh of his
children whom he shall eat; because he hath nothing left him in the siege,
and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee in
all thy gates. The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not
adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness
and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom,
and toward her son and toward her daughter, and toward her young one that
cometh forth from between her feet, and toward her children which she
shall bear: for she shall eat them for want of all things secretly in
the siege and straitness wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee in
thy gates.”
The prophecy goes on to declare that the people of Israel were to be greatly
diminished in numbers, were to be "plucked off the land, " and
were to be scattered "among all people, from one end of the earth
even to the other, " where they were to "find no ease."
These predictions—terrible in their nature beyond all comparison—were
fulfilled with appalling exactness and literalness in the siege of Jerusalem,
and in the dispersion which followed it, and which has lasted until now.
As we come to realize the character of these awful distresses, we shall
surely be thankful that "all things which were written, " concerning
the afflictions of the people of Israel, have now been "fulfilled."
We can but rejoice that there is no support whatever for the view that
a time of distress, exceeding in severity the horrors of the siege of
Jerusalem, yet awaits that much afflicted people.
It should be noticed that the nation whereof Moses speaks in this prophecy
was to come "from far, " and was to be one whose tongue the
Jews did not understand. Those specifications fit the Romans, but not
the Assyrians or Chaldeans. Furthermore, in the tribulation foretold by
Moses the people were to be plucked off the land and scattered among all
nations "from one end of the earth even to the other." This
describes the result of the capture of Jerusalem by Titus, and not that
of its capture by Nebuchadnezzar.
Prominent among the "things that were written" aforetime, and
which our Lord said were to be "fulfilled" at the approaching
destruction of Jerusalem, was that "time of trouble" foretold
in (#Da 12:1, ) at which time some of Daniel’s people were to be
delivered, even such as should be found "written in the book."
This latter expression had come to mean, since the days of Moses (#Ex
32:32) those who were accepted by God and owned as His. Such (i.e., believers
in the Lord Jesus Christ) were "delivered" at that time through
giving heed to His warnings.
THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION
There is need that special attention be given to the words, "When
ye therefore shall see THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION, spoken of by Daniel
the prophet, stand in the holy place (whoso readeth let him understand);
then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains, " etc. (#Mt
24:15,16). The passage is the same in Mark except that, instead of "stand
in the holy place, " we read, "standing where it ought not."
In Luke the corresponding passage reads, "And when ye shall see JERUSALEM
COMPASSED WITH ARMIES, then know that THE DESOLATION thereof is nigh.
Then let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains, " etc.
This passage was, to the Lord’s disciples then in Jerusalem and Judea,
the most important of the entire prophecy; for it gave "the sign"
whereby they were to know that the "desolation, " predicted
in Daniel 9:26, was at hand, and upon "seeing" which they were
to flee. Luke describes the sign in plain language. The encompassing of
Jerusalem by armies was to be the warning that its desolation was nigh.
But Matthew (for a reason which can be discerned) uses terms such that
others than the disciples would not readily "understand" the
meaning. To us, however, it should be clear, upon a mere comparison of
the passages, that the armies which were to accomplish the "desolation"
of the city were "the abomination of desolation." But we will
look further into the matter.
We have already pointed out that the word "abomination" means
any hateful or detestable thing. It would most fittingly apply to the
Roman armies on their mission of destruction. Indeed the descriptive words,
"of desolation, " fix the meaning definitely. Yet, according
to an interpretation that is widely accepted at this time, it means the
setting up of an idol for worship in a Jewish temple which (it is supposed)
will be built at Jerusalem in the days of Antichrist. But, in that case,
the words "of desolation" would be quite out of place; for no
one will contend that Jerusalem is to be again made a desolation. Another
insuperable objection to that view is that God would not regard or speak
of any part of such a temple as "the holy place."
Our modern expositors have been misled by this expression (used by Matthew)
"the holy place." They have assumed that it meant the holy of
holies in the temple. But it does not mean that at all. Anyone, with the
help of a concordance (as Young’s or Strong’s) or a Greek dictionary,
can see for himself that the word used for "place" in Matthew
24:15 (#Mt 24:15) is topos, which means simply a locality (we derive from
it the words topical, topography, etc.). It is used in expressions like
"a desert place, "" dry places." The holy land, Judea,
is therefore the "holy place, " where the heathen armies, with
their idolatrous standards and pagan sacrifices, were to stand. Mark puts
it simply as "standing where it ought not." On the other hand,
the term hagios topos is never used of the holy of holies of the temple.
(See original text of #Heb 9:12,24,25.)
The Lord was referring to the particular "abomination of desolation
spoken of by Daniel the prophet, " and at this point occurs the exhortation,
"Whoso readeth let him understand." The expression "abomination
of desolation" is found only in the Septuagint version of Daniel
9:27 (#Da 9:27). what then was it that is referred to in that verse? Clearly
it is that which was to be God’s instrument in bringing about the
predicted "desolation." The Hebrew text, of which our A. V.
is a translation, reads "and for the overspreading of abominations,
he shall make it desolate." If instead of "for, " we read,
"by the overspreading of abominations, " we have a very good
indication of the spreading abroad of the Roman armies.
In Daniel 11:31 and 12:11, (#Da 11:31, 12:11) is a slightly different
expression which makes the meaning more clear, namely, "abomination
that maketh desolate."
That the words "When ye see the abomination of desolation stand in
the holy place" do not mean the setting up of an idol in the inner
sanctuary, further appears by consideration of the fact that it was when
the disciples should see the thing referred to, that they were to know
it was time for them to flee. Manifestly the setting up of an idol in
the inner sanctuary could not be a sign to the Lord’s people to flee.
That would be a thing which only the priests could "see." And
it could not possibly be a sign to "them that be in Judea."
Whereas the invading armies would be a sight which all could see.
Furthermore, the setting up of an idol in the sanctuary is a thing which
could not be done until the city and temple were taken by the enemy, which
would be at the end of the siege. Hence it could not possibly serve as
a sign to the disciples to save themselves from the horrors of the siege
by timely flight.
The difference between the way Matthew describes this sign to flee, and
the way Luke describes it, is accounted for by the fact that Matthew’s
Gospel was written primarily for circulation among the Palestinian Jews.
We can understand, therefore, why the Holy Spirit inspired him to use
an expression which would not be understood except by the disciples. But
no such reason would exist in the case of Luke’s Gospel, he being
the companion of Paul in his journeys through the Greek provinces, and
his Gospel having been written primarily for Gentile converts. Matthew
and Mark have the significant admonition, "Whoso readeth let him
understand." But in Luke, where the meaning is stated in clear words,
that admonition is not found.
In confirmation of our view as to the abomination of desolation, we quote
the following from a sound and standard work, Smith’s Bible Dictionary:
“Abomination of Desolation, mentioned by our Saviour, (#Mt 24:15,
) as a sign of the approaching destruction of Jerusalem, with reference
to (#Da 9:27; 11:31; 12:11). The prophecy referred ultimately to the destruction
of Jerusalem by the Romans, and consequently the abomination must describe
some occurrence connected with that event ..... Most people refer it to
the standards or banners of the Roman army.”
We believe, however, that it is not the standards carried by the armies,
but the armies themselves that constituted the abomination of desolation,
or that maketh desolate. This conclusion is fully supported by the facts,
(1) that where Matthew says "when ye see the abomination of desolation,
" Luke says "when ye see Jerusalem encompassed with armies,
then know that the desolation thereof is nigh"; and (2) the armies
were the agency whereby the "desolation" was accomplished.
In further confirmation of our view as to this point we quote also from
Farquharson the following clear passage:
“Christ expressly names it (the abomination of desolation) as one
of the previous signs, whereby those whom He then addressed would become
aware of the immediate approach of that destruction of Jerusalem which
He Himself foretold, and which, He said, would occur before the generation
contemporary with Himself on earth passed away (#Mt 24:34). Besides, Christ,
by the term ’abomination of desolation’ did not mean any temple
built to a strange god, or any profane sacrifices. These are indeed abominable;
but they are not desolators. Luke has preserved the explanation which
Christ Himself gave of those terms (’when ye see Jerusalem compassed
with armies, ’etc. #Lu 21:20), as we shall have occasion afterwards
more particularly to show; and Bishop Newton, in his illustration of Christ’s
own prophecy, refers to the explanation furnished by Luke and admits that
the abomination of desolation signifies the heathen armies.”
Also from the same author we quote the following passage, which occurs
in the course of his comments upon Daniel 12:1, "And at that time
thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in
the book":—
“The prediction of the prophet then, in this latter part of the first
verse, was fulfilled in that part of Daniel’s people who, obeying
the call of the Saviour to faith in Him, and repentance and new obedience,
obtained through His blood eternal redemption. Although the Jewish rulers
and the greater part. of the nation would not have Him to be their King,
but delivered Him up to the Gentiles, yet says Paul, ’God hath not
cast away His people which He foreknew, ’but, as in the days of Elias
He reserved to Himself seven thousand men who had not bowed the knee to
the image of Baal, even so now, ’at this present time also, there
is a remnant according to the election of grace’ (#Ro 11:2-5). Within
a short time after Christ’s ascension this ’remnant’ amounted
to several thousands (#Ac 2:41 4:4); and afterwards ’believers were
added to the Lord, multitudes of men and women’ (#Ac 5:14). These
were at that time ’delivered.’ *** But there was added to the
eternal deliverance they thus obtained a temporal deliverance also, in
that ’time of trouble, ”during which their unbelieving countrymen
perished by sword and famine. For He in Whom they believed had taught
them the signs that should precede the approaching calamities, and had
warned them to escape from them by a timely flight (#Mt 24:15,16). Of
His warnings they availed themselves. We learn from ecclesiastical histories,
’says Bishop Newton, ’that at this juncture (the approach of
the siege of Jerusalem) all who believed in Christ departed from Jerusalem,
and removed to Pella and other places beyond the river Jordan; so that
they all marvellously escaped the general shipwreck of their countrymen;
and we do not read anywhere that so much as one of them perished in the
destruction of Jerusalem.’ Thus, in every sense, ’at that time
Daniel’s people were delivered, all who were found written in the
book.’ "
LUKE’S ACCOUNT. IS IT THE SAME DISCOURSE?
We would notice at this point an idea which has been advanced by a few
commentators (not any of prominence so far as we are aware) namely that
the account found in Luke 21 is that of a different utterance of Christ
from that reported in the corresponding parts of Matthew and Mark. This
idea is really a confirmation of what we have been seeking to prove; for
those who suggest it must have recognized that, if Luke 21 (#Lu 21$) gives
us an account of the same utterance as is reported by the other two gospel
writers, then it must be that the "great tribulation" of the
latter is the fall of Jerusalem described by the former, and "the
abomination of desolation" is the armed Roman force.
But the idea referred to above is utterly untenable. According to each
of the three writers the discourse occurred just after Christ left the
temple for the last time; and according to each it began with the same
words ("not one stone shall be left upon another"); and moreover
the prophetic part was spoken in reply to the question of the disciples
("tell us, " etc.). And not only so, but the account by Luke
follows the same order as the others, and uses in many passages precisely
the same words. It is simply an impossibility that there should have been
two distinct discourses on the same day, arising out of the same incident,
and in response to the same question, from the same disciples.
It is nothing to the purpose that Matthew and Mark state the place where
the conversation took place (the Mount of Olives) whereas Luke omits mention
of that detail. There would be as much ground to argue that Christ endured
two different agonies on the night of His betrayal, in two different places,
because, while Matthew and Mark give Gethsemane as the place, Luke does
not specify the name of the locality where what he describes (with differences
of detail from the others) took place.
The proof is conclusive that the three accounts refer to one and the same
discourse, and that what Luke plainly identifies as the then approaching
destruction of Jerusalem, the other two evangelists spoke of under the
general term "great tribulation."
ISRAEL’S LAST PROBATION
We have sought to impress upon our readers the fact that the destruction
of Jerusalem, and the final breakup of the Jewish nation, was a matter
of immense importance in the history of the world, as divinely viewed
and written. We would now, in closing this chapter, call attention to
the fact that God, in marvellous forbearance and goodness, did not execute
His righteous judgment upon the nation at once, but gave them a final
period of probation, which lasted just 40 years, from A.D. 30, when the
Lord was crucified, to A.D. 70, when the city was destroyed and the nation
exterminated.
The number 40 appears to be the measure of full probation. The Israelites
were tested for 40 years in the wilderness at the beginning of their national
career. That was under the Law. And at the end thereof, God gave them
another probation of 40 years, under the Gospel. Other periods of full
probation are found in the Scriptures, as when Moses left the people to
themselves, while he was in the mountain 40 days. The first three kings
of Israel (Saul, David and Solomon) reigned the full period of 40 years.
And finally our Lord was tested for 40 days in the wilderness, with the
wild beasts, and tempted of the devil.
THE TIME OF JACOB’S TROUBLE
The reference to "the time of Jacob’s trouble" is found
in (#Jer 30:5-7). From what appears in chapter 29:1, as well as from the
immediate context, it is evident that the prophecy concerning Jacob’s
trouble was spoken after the captivity in Babylon had begun; so it was
not the punishment inflicted by Nebuchadnezzar that the prophet was foretelling.
This is made very plain by the verses immediately preceding the prophecy
of Jacob’s trouble, in which God says that He will bring again the
captivity of His people and cause them to return to the land of their
fathers. So the predicted order of events was the return of the captivity
from Babylon, and after that the time of Jacob’s trouble, which is
foretold in these striking words:
“For thus saith the Lord; We have heard a voice of trembling, of
fear, and not of peace. Ask ye now and see whether a man doth travail
with child? Wherefore do I see every man with his hands on his loins,
as a woman in travail, and all faces are turned into paleness? Alas! for
that day is great, so that none is like it; it is even the time of Jacob’s
trouble; but he shall be saved out of it”(#Jer 30:5-7).
The destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans is a complete fulfilment of
this prophecy. Why then should we ignore a conspicuous historical fulfilment
and surmise a fulfilment in the future, for which there is no proof?
The words "none is like it" establish the fact that "the
time of Jacob’s trouble, " foretold by Jeremiah, is the same
as the "time of trouble such as never was, " foretold to Daniel
by the man clothed in linen, and the same as the "great tribulation
such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, nor ever
shall be, " foretold by the Lord as then about to come upon the people.
For there cannot be two such times of trouble.
Likewise the words of Jeremiah, "But he shall be saved out of it,
" agree with the words, "Thy people shall be delivered, every
one that shall be found written in the book" (#Da 12:1); and with
the words of Christ, "But he that shall endure unto the end, the
same shall be saved" (#Mt 24:13). The agreement is striking.
Jeremiah, after prophesying the time of Jacob’s trouble (of the particulars
whereof he gives no description) proceeds to speak of another captivity
for the nation, and of God’s purpose to gather His people out of
it, and to restore them again to their own land (#Jer 30:10,11). This
confirms the view that the captivity referred to in verse 3 is that in
Babylon. Moreover, the terms used in describing the captivity spoken of
in verses 10 and 11 show that it was a world-wide dispersion. For God
says: "I will save thee from afar … and Israel shall return
and be at rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid." So
here we have a captivity in distant lands, to be followed by a restoration
and blessing—not by another tribulation. Further, we read: "For
I am with thee, saith the Lord, to save thee: though I make a full end
of all nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full
end of end of thee" (#Jer 30:11).
Thus, according to all these three great prophecies which we have been
studying and comparing, there was to be a time of unequalled trouble for
Israel, followed by a world wide scattering of the survivors, and with
this, history is in perfect agreement; for the time of trouble, such as
never was either before or since, came within the generation specified
by Christ, and was immediately followed by a world wide dispersion of
the Jews, which has lasted until now; yet God has not made a full end
of them.
All this is completely reversed by a current system of interpretation
of prophecy, which makes the dispersion of the people of Israel come first,
and the time of "trouble such as never was" to be reserved for
them afterward, when God shall have brought them again, and finally, to
their own land.
THE GREAT TRIBULATION OF REVELATION VII
In Revelation 7:9-17 (#Re 7:9-17) is described the vision of a great multitude
which no man could number, of all nations and kindreds, and people, and
tongues, of whom it is said that "These are they which came out of
great tribulation" (or "out of the great tribulation")
"and have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of
the Lamb."
There is nothing in this passage to show that the tribulation referred
to is yet future, or to justify the expression, commonly heard in some
quarters, "tribulation saints." What John is here permitted
to see is, not a future tribulation, but the future blessedness of those
who, while on earth, were in great tribulation. The time when the tribulation
occurred is not indicated at all.
We do not identify the tribulation of Matthew 24:21 with that of Revelation
7:14. The former is a specific event in history, and one that pertained
strictly to the Jewish people. The latter is general and indefinite. There
were people out of every nation, kindred, tongue and tribe, involved in
it. The probability is (though at present we cannot express a decided
opinion about it) that the company referred to (whose blessedness is precisely
the same as that of all the redeemed as described in (#Re 21:3,4)) embraces
all those who have suffered for the truth’s sake, during all the
centuries of persecution under imperial Rome and papal Rome. That tribulation,
being of quite a different sort from the concrete tribulation which befell
Jerusalem in A.D. 70, does not come into comparison with it. There was
to be nothing of that sort to exceed it.
There is no good reason for doubting that the A.V. gives the true sense
in saying, "These are they which came out of great tribulation, "
which words do not specify a special class of sufferers, who passed through
some special period of affliction. We utterly reject the idea of a separate
company of "tribulation saints, " segregated from the main company
of the redeemed, and appointed to some inferior sphere of blessing.
{a} The stones of the Temple were of huge dimensions. Edersheim says:
"According to Josephus the city was so upheaved and dug up that it
was difficult to believe it had ever been inhabited. At a later period
Turnus Rufus had the plowshare drawn over it. In regard to the temple
walls, notwithstanding the massiveness of the stones, there was nothing
left in place, with the exception of some corner or portion of wall—left
almost to show how great had been the ruin and desolation."
Index - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - 16 - Appendix
