Translation & Sermon by Nate Wilson for Christ The Redeemer Church, Manhattan, KS, 11 Aug 2013
24:32 Learn the parable from the fig tree:
When its tender branch has already grown, and it sprouts its leaves,
ya’ll know that the summer is near.
24:33 Thus also, when you yourselves happen to see all these things,
keep knowing that it is near – upon the doors!
24:34 Really, I’m telling y’all there is no possibility of this generation passing away
until whenever all these things happen.
24:35 The sky and the earth will pass away,
but my words have no possibility of passing away.
24:36 But concerning that day and hour, no one except My Father alone [can] perceive –
not even the angels of the heavens [not even the Son].
24:37 And just as the days of Noah were, so also the coming of the Son of Man will be,
24:38 for [just] as, in the days before the flood,
they were munching and drinking, getting married and marrying off –
until that day Noah entered into the ark,
24:39 and they did not understand
until the flood came and took away absolutely[1] all men,
thus also will be the coming of the Son of Man.
24:40 At that time, two will be [working] in the field:
one man being taken along and one man being forsaken.
24:41 Two will be grinding [flour] using the mill:
one woman being taken along and one woman being forsaken.
24:42 Therefore, stay alert, because y’all don’t know in which day your Lord is coming.
From the back cover of John Noe’s book, Beyond the End Times: The Rest of The Greatest Story Ever Told: “In this book you’ll discover: Why the perennial prophets of doom have been and always will be dead wrong, Why the world will never-ever end, How the end for the world came right on time, The time and nature of Christ’s past return, The true identity of the ‘new heaven and the new earth,’ Why the future is bright and promising, The basis for the next reformation of Christianity.”
On the other hand, we have folks like Hal Lindsey, author of the New York Times bestseller, The Late, Great Planet Earth, in which he stated, “The Bible foretold modern man’s countdown to extinction…” and later in a sequel book wrote, “I wouldn’t make any long-term earthly plans… the end times are almost here.[2]”
Well who’s right? And what do we do about it? One thing we can count on is that of all people, at least Jesus knows what He’s talking about when it comes to the end times, and that’s something Jesus is talking about in Matthew 24.
The disciples asked Jesus that evening on the Mount of Olives what the sign would be of His coming and of the end of the age. I believe that the disciples were asking when Jesus would come into His own, in the Messianic role of purging evil out of the world. So I conclude that Jesus is foretelling the downfall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, saying that this event will punish the evil people in Jerusalem and bring an end to an age of God’s favor with the Jews and dismantle their temple stone from stone. I also believe that Jesus is seeing past that event and also relating signs of His second coming which will have many similarities. But the point of this whole discourse is not to pinpoint the time of these comings but to develop a certain attitude toward the world and world events – a certain way of life – in His disciples based upon the sure knowledge that God’s judgment is coming soon.
24:32 Learn the parable [lessonNIV,ESV] from the fig tree: When its tender branch has already grown, and it sprouts its leaves, ya’ll know that the summer is near.
Απο δε της συκης μαθετε την παραβολην: ‘οταν ηδη ‘ο κλαδος αυτης γενηται ‘απαλος[3] και τα φυλλα εκφυη[4] γινωσκετε ‘οτι εγγυς το θερος.
24:33 Thus also, when you yourselves happen to see all these things, keep knowing that it is near – upon the doors!
‘Ουτως και ‘υμεις: ‘οταν ιδητε ταυτα παντα γινωσκετε ‘οτι εγγυς εστιν επι θυραις.
24:34 Really, I’m telling y’all there is no possibility of this generation passing away until whenever all these things happen.
Αμην λεγω ‘υμιν [8] ου μη παρελθῃ ‘η γενεα ‘αυτη ‘εως αν παντα ταυτα γενηται.
24:35 The sky and the earth will pass away, but my words have no possibility of passing away.
‘Ο ουρανος και ‘η γη παρελευσονται[13] ‘οι δε λογοι μου ου μη παρελθωσιν.
24:36 But concerning that day and hour, no one except My Father alone [can] perceive – not even the angels of the heavens [not even the Son].
Περι δε της ‘ημερας εκεινης και [14] ‘ωρας ουδεις οιδεν ουδε ‘οι αγγελοι των ουρανων [ουδε ‘ο Υιος[15]] ει μη ‘ο πατηρ [μου[16]] μονος,
24:37 And just as the days of Noah were, so also the coming of the Son of Man will be,
‘ωσπερ δε[18] ‘αι ‘ημεραι του Νωε ‘ουτως εσται και[19] ‘η παρουσια του ‘υιου του ανθρωπου.
24:38 for [just] as, in the days before the flood, they were munching and drinking, getting married and marrying off – until that day Noah entered into the ark,
‘Ως[περ[20]] γαρ ησαν εν ταις ‘ημεραις [21] ταις προ του κατακλυσμου τρωγοντες[22] και πινοντες γαμουντες και [εκ]γαμιζοντες[23] αχρι ἧς ‘ημερας εισηλθεν Νωε εις την κιβωτον,
24:39 and they did not understand until the flood came and took away absolutely[24] all men, thus also will be the coming of the Son of Man.
και ουκ εγνωσαν ‘εως ηλθεν ‘ο κατακλυσμος και ηρεν ‘απαντας ‘ουτως εσται και[25] ‘η παρουσια του ‘υιου του ανθρωπου.
24:40 At that time, two will be [working] in the field: one man being taken along and one man being forsaken.
Τοτε δυο εσονται εν τω αγρω ‘ο ‘εις παραλαμβανεται και ‘ο[27] ‘εις αφιεται,
24:41 Two will be grinding [flour] using the mill: one woman being taken along and one woman being forsaken.
δυο αληθουσαι εν τω μυλω[νι[28]] μια παραλαμβανεται και μια αφιεται.
24:42 Therefore, stay alert, because y’all don’t know in which day [hour] your Lord is coming.
Γρηγορειτε ουν ‘οτι ουκ οιδατε ποιᾳ ημερᾳ[31] ‘ο κυριος ‘υμων ερχεται.
[1] The Greek word hapantas is emphatic, so I added an emphasis word to the word “all” to translate this accurately.
[2] Planet Earth – 2000 AD: Will Mankind Survive” (1994)
[3] Not used in New Testament outside of this statement, but here is context for its use in the Greek Old Testament: Young and tender (Genesis 18:7, 27:9 “two kid goats/calves, tender and good, and I will make them meats for thy father”), Young, weak, unconditioned (Genesis 33:13 “if then I shall drive them hard one day, all the cattle will die”), Mild-mannered, unassertive (Deuteronomy 28:54-56 even these will aggressively fight their own family members for food in the siege of Jerusalem), Young and inexperienced (1 Chronicles 22:5, 29:1 “My son Solomon is a tender child,” Isaiah 47:1 “virgin daughter”).
[4] Not found anywhere else in the Bible outside of this verse and its parallel in Mark 13:28. Erasmus accented it Aorist Passive, and Westcott & Hort labeled it Present active.
[5] I think this is a good way to interpret the Aorist tense of this Greek imperative.
[6] Calvin has a completely unexpected take: “As the inward sap diffused through the whole tree produces softness, then, gathering strength breaks out to renew the dead wood, so the Lord draws from the corruption of the outward man the full restoration of His people. Briefly they should not judge from the weak and feeble state of the Church that it is dying but rather hope for the immortal glory…”
[7] Louw & Nida define this phrase “at the doors” in Matthew 24:33 as meaning “soon” (cf. James 5:9), but it obviously does not mean that in most of its uses in the Greek Bible, cf. 1Sam. 21:13; Job. 5:4; 31:9; Prov. 9:14; Cant. 7:13.
[8] On the basis of a few early Greek manuscripts (B, D, L, Θ, f1, f13) Critical editions add the word ‘οτι “that” to introduce the following discourse, but it is not in the majority of Greek manuscripts (including very early ones א, W, 0133), neither is it necessary to introduce a quote in Greek with this word. It doesn’t change the meaning either way – the English versions which follow the Critical text do not even carry the word through into their translations.
[9] Cf. double negatives with aorist subjunctive verbs in Christ’s statements in Matthew: 5:18, 20 & 26, 10:23 & 42, 13:14, 16:28, 18:3, 23:39 (not taste death until you see the son of man coming in His kingdom), 24:2, 21 & 35, 26:29
[10] “Whether we take this to mean that the whole would be fulfilled within the limits of the generation then current, or, according to a usual way of speaking, that the generation then existing would not pass away without seeing a begun fulfillment of this prediction, the facts entirely correspond. For either the whole was fulfilled in the destruction accomplished by Titus, as many think; or, if we stretch it out, according to others, till the thorough dispersion of the Jews a little later, under Adrian, every requirement of our Lord’s words seems to be met.” ~Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown
[11] John Calvin wrote of this, “Christ… simply teaches that, in one generation, events would establish all He had said. Within fifty years the city was wiped out… the faithful would actually and openly experience, before the end of one generation, how true His oracle was, for the Apostles suffered the same things as we see today.”
[12] He puts also the similitude of the fig tree, indicating that the interval was not great, but that in quick succession would occur His advent also. And this He declared not by the parable alone, but by the words that follow, saying, “know that it is near, even at the doors… How then, one may ask, did He say, “This generation?” Speaking not of the generation then living, but of that of the believers… as when He saith, “This is the generation of them that seek the Lord.” … He declares here also, saying, All these things shall surely come to pass, and the generation of the faithful shall remain, cut off by none of the things that have been mentioned. For both Jerusalem shall perish, and the more part of the Jews shall be destroyed, but over this generation shall nothing prevail, not famine, not pestilence, not earthquake, nor the tumults of wars, not false Christs, not false prophets, not deceivers, not traitors, not those that cause to offend, not the false brethren, nor any other such like temptation whatever. ~Chrysostom
[13] Critical texts opt for the singular form of this verb (παρελευσεται) found in a few of the older Greek manuscripts (B, D, L, 0133) but again, for some reason, there is precious little support for that reading in the later manuscripts, so the question arises as to why it was rejected. The most obvious explanation is that there is a compound subject (“heaven and earth”), which reads better with a plural verb. Heaven and earth can be taken together as one universe, so there is no change to the meaning whether you go with the majority reading or the Critical reading.
[14] The Textus Receptus adds the definite article “the” (της) here, without significant support from Greek manuscripts, but it doesn’t change the meaning. The KJV doesn’t even bring it through into English.
[15] Although not in the majority of Greek Manuscripts, the earliest manuscript found without it dates only to the 5th century. The phrase is found in three manuscripts dating from that time or earlier (א, B, D), and a smattering of later manuscripts, as well as many of the pre-Vulgate Italian translations, and a few other early versions and Church fathers, including the Diatesseron (dating to the 2nd Century). So the earliest manuscripts have it, but the reasons it is not found in the majority of the Greek manuscripts copied later on are not fully known, thus the UBS critical edition of the Greek New Testament included the phrase but noted that there is a “considerable degree of doubt” about it. Since the following phrase is “but the/my Father alone,” it could be inferred that the Son and the Spirit do not know, so the inclusion of the phrase is not contradictory to its context and does not necessarily add new information. See next footnote.
[16] Although in the majority of Greek manuscripts, the earliest-known manuscript to include it is the 5th Century W, and there are older ones which do not include it. Thus it is in the NAS, NIV, and ESV, but not in the KJV. The manuscripts which omit “nor the Son” have “my Father” and the manuscripts which include “nor the Son” simply say “the Father.”
[17] Chrysostom argued, however, that Jesus must have known but just didn’t want to reveal that information to His disciples so that they would stay more alert. Calvin resolved the difficulty by lodging the ignorance in Christ’s pre-resurrection human nature, which obviously had limitations, but not in Christ’s divine nature.
[18] On the basis of only three Greek manuscripts (B, D, 067), Critical editions of the GNT change the de (“so”) to gar “for,” so I think it is unwarranted and doesn’t make sense, but even a causal rather than a conjunction isn’t a significant change in meaning. KJV renders “but,” ESV & NAS render “for,” and NIV omits it altogether.
[19] Critical editions of the GNT omit this conjunction because it is not found in the two earliest-known uncials (א, Β – and a smattering of other later ones), however, it is in the vast majority of Greek manuscripts all the way up to some of the earliest ones (D, W, Θ, 067, 0133), so I think it should be kept in. It is a dispensable word, though, for the comparative (houtws) at the outset of the clause makes it clear that this is an “also” situation, whether or not the word “also” is explicit.
[20] On the basis of two 2nd Century Greek manuscripts, one 8th Century manuscript, and two 9th century manuscripts, the Critical editions use an abbreviated word, the longer form of which is found in the vast majority of Greek manuscripts, including two 5th century documents, two 6th century documents and hundreds of later witnesses. I’m inclined to go with the majority here, suspecting the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus of bring prone to abbreviation. It makes no difference in translation, though. All the English versions render both forms as “For.”
[21] On the basis of little more than two ancient manuscripts (B&D), the Critical editions insert the word εκειναις (“those” – ESV, NAS). This is not adequate textual support for deviating from the wording of the majority of Greek manuscripts, including manuscripts just as ancient, and I think the NIV editors were sensible to restrain themselves from that insertion.
[22] This is not the standard Greek word for “eat” (phagomai) but rather a word having to do with physical act of chewing. In the Greek Bible it is only found in Micah 7:4; Matthew 24:38; John 6:54-58; 13:18. Why does John particularly use it to speak of eating heavenly food?
[23] The “ek-” prefix does not change the meaning, but is found in the majority of Greek manuscripts (incl. L, Θ, 067, 0133). Two older Greek manuscripts (א, D) don’t have the prefix, so the Critical editions follow the latter. A couple other of the oldest-known Greek manuscripts (B, W) read passive “being given in marriage,” but they are not regarded by any modern editors as authentic here.
[24] The Greek word hapantas is emphatic, so I added an emphasis word to the word “all” to translate this accurately.
[25] B & D omit the “also” here, so early Critical editions did too, and the NASB, NIV, and ESV followed suit, but this is not adequate textual grounds to deviate from the hundreds (thousands?) of Greek manuscripts to the contrary, some of which date back just as early, and the kai was re-instated in the 3rd edition of the Nestle-Aland GNT.
[26] 1Pet. 3:19-20 “…made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark…” 2Pet. 2:5 “and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness…”
[27] I can find no textual basis for the omission of the definite articles found in the majority of Greek manuscripts, but they are omitted from the Critical editions and from the NAS, NIV, ESV, and even NKJ. In Greek, the word “one” is repeated rather than being followed by the word “other.” The dissimilarities between Greek and English force a translator to make a small compromise, either bringing the definite articles through and translating the second Greek word for “one” paraphrastically as “other,” or we can drop the definite articles to make “one…one” work in English.
[28] This is the majority reading, supported by D & Θ, but Critical editions go with the abbreviated form of the word based on a good number of manuscripts (א, B, K, L, W, Γ, Δ, 067, 0133, etc.). The more-abbreviated form is actually the more standard spelling of the dative singular, and the longer form found in the Byzantine and Textus Receptus editions is a more irregular spelling of the dative singular, probably no difference in meaning, although A.T. Robertson suggested that the longer form of the word indicated an industrial mill and the shorter form indicated a home model. By the way, the word “one” changes in gender from v.40 to v.41, indicating that the masculine gender of the word “one” in the previous verse is referring specifically to men, whereas the feminine “one’s” in this verse refer specifically to women.
[29] cf. same wording “grinding in the mill” in Num. 11:8 re: manna. This millwork is what Samson was put to after he was captured by the Philistines, replacing the mule or camel which was normally used to turn the millstone. It’s the same millstone that Jesus mentioned tying to an offender’s neck, and that was dropped over the city wall to kill Abimelech (Judg. 9:53), and it is distinguished from mortar and pestle – a one-man grinding process – in Num. 11. Vincent mentions a medium-sized, hand-operated variety requiring two women, perhaps thus the NIV “hand-mill.”
[30] Calvin’s application is, “Christ determined to cut away all delays and encourage each individual to hurry and not to wait in vain for the partners to which they are joined… He is the rallying place of solid unity, where all the children of God ought to be gathered together.”
[31] The Byzantine and Textus Receptus editions of the GNT read ωρᾳ “hour” (thus the KJV), but the earliest-known manuscript with “hour” instead of “day” dates to the 8th Century, and all other manuscripts predating it (א, B, C, D, W) – as well as some others after it (notably Δ Θ) read “day” (thus the NASB, NIV, ESV, NET)
[32] Chrysostom seemed to consider it merely 70 AD, whereas Calvin and Henry seemed to refer this to both eschatological and first Century times in an overlapping way (“type and figure” ~Henry), which I also do; Jamieson Fausset & Brown, A.T. Robertson, A.B. Bruce, and Wm. Hendriksen seemed to go both ways, not as overlapping, but referring v.34 to 70AD and v.36 to eschatology (Grotius noted the distinction between the tauta “these things” in v.34 and the ekeine “those days” in v.36, which is a good exegetical point), Bob Jones Sr. seemed to refer it all to eschatology.