Milton Terry
Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament exegesis
and theology
From His 1898 Work, Biblical Apocalyptics
And From His 1898 Work, Biblical Hermeneutics
On the shaking of Heaven and Earth and Psalm
18
"The simplest reader of this psalm observes that, in answer to the prayer
of the one in distress, Jehovah reveals himself in marvelous power and
glory. He disturbs for his sake all the elements of the earth and the
heavens.
He descends from the lofty sky as if bending down
the visible clouds and making a pathway of massive darkness under his
feet. He seems to ride upon a chariot, borne along by cherubims, and
moving swiftly as the winds... In the psalmist's thought winds, fire,
hail, smoke, clouds, waters, lightenings, and earthquake are conceived as
immediately subservient to Jehovah, who interposes for the rescue of his
devout servant." (Biblical Apocalyptics,p. 25)
Terry gave a footnote on this by Perowne which
said:
"David's deliverance was, of course, not really
accompanied by such convulsions of nature, by earthquake, and fire, and
tempest; but his deliverance, or rather his manifold deliverance, gathered
into one, as he thinks of them, appear to him as marvelous a proof of the
divine power, as verily effected by the immediate presence and finger of
God, as if he had come down in visible form to accomplish them. - The Book
of Psalms, new translation, vol. i. p. 186, 1876 (Biblical Apocalyptics,
p. 25)
On Matthew 24:34
"But we can find no word or sentence which appears designated to impress
anyone with the idea that the destruction in question and the parousia
would be far separate as to time. The one, it is said, will immediately
follow the other, and all will take place before that generation shall
pass away" (Biblical Apocalyptics, p. 439)
"On what valid hermeneutical principle, then, can
it be fairly claimed that this discourse of Jesus comprehends all
futurity? Why should we look for the revelations of far distant ages and
millenniums of human history in a prophecy expressly limited to the
generation in which it was uttered? (Biblical Apocalyptics, p. 443)
"We are driven, then, by every sound principle of
hermeneutics, to conclude that Matt. xxiv, 29-31, must be included within
the time-limits of the discourse of which it forms an essential part, and
cannot be legitimately applied to events far separate from the final
catastrophe of the Jewish State." (Biblical Apocalyptics, p. 449)
On Matthew 24:30-31
"Some expositors fall into the error of identifying the coming of the Son
of man with the destruction of Jerusalem. These events are rather to be
spoken of as coincident, in that the Messianic reign is conceived as
following immediately after the tribulation of those days. The overthrow
of Jerusalem was only one act of judgment of the King of glory, and should
be so distinguished." (Biblical Apocalyptics, p. 242)
On Matthew 24:1
"... all these sayings of Jesus are capable of a self-consistent and
satisfactory explanation of a prophecy of what was in the near future when
he uttered them. The overthrow of the Jewish temple and the subsequent
going forth of the new kingdom of Christ in the world are the main
subject. We adopt this hypothesis as the only tenable explanation of the
language which all tree synoptists ascribe to Jesus on this occasion of
his concluding his teaching in the temple" (Biblical Apocalyptics, p. 218)
On Matthew 24:30
"The language of Matt. xxiv, 30, concerning 'the Son of man coming in the
clouds of heaven with power and much glory," is taken from Daniel's night
vision (Daniel vii, 13) in which he saw the Son of man coming to the
Ancient of Days and receiving from him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom.
That vision was a part of the compost of
world-empire, and signified that "the kingdom and dominion, and the
greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the
people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting
kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him' (Dan vii,27).
The kingdom received from the Ancient of Days is
no other than the kingdom symbolized by the stone cut out of the mountain,
in chap 22,34,35, which 'became a great mountain and filled all the land.'
This is the kingdom of the Messiah, which the Chialists believe to be be
yet future, but which is more generally believe to be the Gospel
dispensation, a kingdom not of this world, and not inaugurated with
phenomenal splendor visible to mortal eyes. Like the stone cut out of the
mountain, and the mustard seed, it is small and comparatively unimportant
at its beginning, but it grows so as to fill the earth.
This kingdom, according to Jesus' own testimony
(Luke xvii,20), 'comes not with observation;' that is, says Meyer, 'the
coming of the Messiah's kingdom is not so conditioned that this coming
could be observed as a visible development, or that it could be said, in
consequence of such observation, that here or there is the kingdom.'
It may safely be affirmed, therefore, that this
language concerning the Son of man in the clouds means no more on the lips
of Jesus than in the writings of Daniel. It denotes in both places a
sublime and glorious reality, the grandest event in human history, but not
a visible display in the heavens of such a nature as to be a matter of
scenic observation.
The Son of man came in heavenly power to supplant
Judaism by a better covenant, and to make the kingdoms of the world his
own, and that parousia dates from the fall of Judaism and its temple. The
mourning of 'all the tribes of the land' (not all nations of the globe)
was coincident with the desolation of Zion, and our Lord appropriately
foretold it in language taken from Zech. xii, 11,12" (Biblical
Hermeneutics,p. 446-447)
On Matthew 24:30
"'the sign of the Son of man' may mean the ruin of the Jewish temple,
considered as a sign or token that the old aeon thereby is ended, and the
new Messianic aeon is begun. 'The sign of the prophet Jonah' (Matt. xii,
39; xvi, 4) was no miraculous phenomenon in the heavens. The analogy
between Christ and Jonah for three days and three nights (Matt. xii,40)
may be compared with John ii, 19-21 as suggesting that 'the temple of his
body,' which was raised up in three days, was a prophetic sign that upon
the ruin of Judaism and its temple there would rise that nobler 'spiritual
house' (I Peter ii,5) 'which is his body, the fulness of him who filleth
all in all' (Eph. i,23)" (Biblical Hermeneutics, p.452).
On Matthew 24:29-31
The language is appropriated in the main from the books of Isaiah and
Daniel, but also from other prophets. The following passages are
particularly in point:
For the stars of heaven and the constellations
thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his
going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. (Isa.
13:10)
And all the host of heaven shall be dissolved,
and the heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll: and all their host
shall fall down, as the leaf falleth off from the vine, and as a falling
fig from the fig tree. (Isa. 34:4)
I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one
like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the
Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was
given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations,
and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting
dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall
not be destroyed. (Dan. 7:13,14)
In that day shall there be a great mourning in
Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon. And
the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of
David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan
apart, and their wives apart; The family of the house of Levi apart, and
their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart;
All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart.
(Zech. 12:11-14)
And it shall come to pass in that day, that the
great trumpet shall be blown, and they shall come which were ready to
perish in the land of Assyria, and the outcasts in the land of Egypt,
and shall worship the LORD in the holy mount at Jerusalem. (Isa. 27:13)
If thy dispersion be from extremity of the
heaven to extremity of the heaven, Thence shall the Lord thy God gather
thee. (Sept. of Deut. 30:4)
For from the four winds of the heaven will I
gather you, Saith the Lord (Sept. of Zech. 2:6)
From these quotation it is apparent that there is
scarcely an expression employed in Matthew and Luke which has not been
taken from the Old Testament Scriptures.
Such apocalyptic forms of speech are not to be
assumed to convey in the New Testament a meaning different from that which
they bear in the Hebrew Scriptures. They are part and parcel of the genius
of prophetic language. The language of Isaiah 13:10, is used in a prophecy
of the overthrow of Babylon. That of Isaiah 34:4, refers to the desolation
of Edom.
The ideal of "the Son of man coming in the
clouds" is taken from a prophecy of the Messianic kingdom, which kingdom,
as depicted in Daniel 7:13,14, is no other than the one symbolized in the
same book by a stone cut out of the mountain (Dan. 2:34,35). It is the
same kingdom of heaven which Jesus liken to a grain of mustard seed and to
the working of leaven in the meal (Matt. 13:31-33).
The other citations we have given above show with
equal clearness how both Jesus and his disciples were wont to express
themselves in language which must have been very familiar to those who
from childhood heard the law and the prophets "read in the synagogues
every Sabbath" (Acts 13:27; 15:21).
A strictly literal interpretation of such
pictorial modes of thought leads only to absurdity. Their import must be
studied in the light of the numerous parallels in the Old Testament
writers, which have been extensively presented in the foregoing part of
this volume. But with what show of reason, or on what principle of
"interpreting Scripture by Scripture," can it be maintained that the
language of Isaiah, Joel, and Daniel, allowed by all the best exegetes to
be metaphorical when employed in the Hebrew Scriptures, must be literally
understood when appropriated by Jesus or his apostles?
We sometimes, indeed, are meet with a disputant
who attempts to evade the force of the above question by the plea that if
we interpret one part of Jesus's discourse literally we are bound in
consistency to treat the entire prophecy in the same way.
So, on the other hand, it is urged that if Matt.
24:29-31, for example, be explained metaphorically, we must carry that
same principle through all the rest of the chapter; and if the words "sun,
moon, and heavens" in verse 29 are to be taken figuratively, so should the
words "Judea," and "mountains," and "housetop," and "field" in other parts
of the chapter be explained metaphorically! It is difficult to understand
how such a superficial plea can be seriously put forward by one who has
made a careful study of the Hebrew prophets.
Every one of the Old Testament examples which
have been cited above stands connected, like these apocalyptic saying of
Jesus, with other statements which all readers and expositors have
understood literally. The most proasic writer may at times express himself
through a whole series of sentences in figurative term, and incorporate
the extended metaphor in the midst of the plain narrative of facts. ...
Our fourth and concluding proposition is that
this apocalyptic passage is a sublime symbolic picture of the crisis of
ages in the transition from the Old Testament dispensation to the
Christian era. The word picture must be taken as a whole, and allowed to
convey its grand total impression.
The attempt, in a single passage like Mark
13:24,25, to take each metaphor separately and give it a distinct
application, ruins the whole picture. ... The picture of a collapsing
universe symbolizes the one simple but sublime thought of supernatural
interposition in the affairs of the world, involving remarkable revolution
and change. The element of time does not appear in the picture. So the Son
of man coming on the clouds means here just what it means in Daniel's
vision. It is an apocalyptic concept of the Messiah, as King of heaven and
earth, executing divine judgment and entering with his people upon the
possession and dominion of the kingdoms of the world.
Here again the element of time does not enter,
except it be the associated thought of Daniel's prophecy that "his
dominion is an everlasting dominion" (Dan. 7:14). It is the same coming of
the Son of man in his kingdom which is referred to in Matt. 16:27,28, the
inception of which was to occur before some of those who heard these words
should taste of death. The mourning of all the tribes of the land is the
universal wail and lamentation of Judaism over its national overthrow. In
the fall of their city and Temple the priests, scribes, and elders saw
"the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power" (Matt. 26:64), and
thus it was made manifest to all who read the prophecy aright that "Jesus
the Galilean" has conquered.
The gathering of Christ's elect from the four
winds is the true fulfillment of numerous prophecies which promise the
chosen people that they shall be gathered out of all lands and established
forever in the mountain of God (comp. Amos 9:14,15; Jer. 23:5-8; 32:37-40;
Ezek. 37:21-28). The time and manner of this universal ingathering of the
elect ones cannot be determined from the language of any of these
prophecies. As well might one presume to determine from Jesus's words in
John 12:32, where, when, and in what manner, when the Christ is "lifted up
out of the earth," he will draw all men unto himself.
The point made emphatic, in the eschatological
discourse of Jesus, is that all things contemplated in the apocalyptic
symbolism employed to depict his coming and reign would follow
"immediately after the tribulation of those days" (Matt. 24:29); or, as
Mark has it, "in those days, after that tribulation." That is, the coming
of the kingdom of the Son of man is coincident with the overthrow of
Judaism and its temple, and follows immediately in those very days.
Whatever in this picture necessarily pertains to
the continuous administration of the kingdom on the earth must of course
be permanent, and continue as long as the nature and purpose of each work
requires. When, therefore, it is affirmed that "this generation shall not
pass away until all these things be accomplished," no one supposes that
the kingdom and the power and the glory of the Son of man are to terminate
with that generation.
The kingdom itself is to endure for ages of ages.
It is to increase like the stone cut from the mountain, which itself
"became a great mountain and filled the whole earth." It is to grow and
operate like the mustard seed and the leaven until it accomplish its
heavenly purpose among men.
The entire New Testament teaching concerning the
kingdom of Christ comtemplates a long period, and the abolishing of all
opposing authority and power; "for he must reign until he has put all his
enemies under his feet" (I Cor. 15:25). The overthrow of Jerusalem was one
of the first triumphs of the Messiah's reign, and a sign that he was truly
"seated at the right hand of power." ...
But what ought to settle the question of time
beyond all controversy is the most emphatic declaration: "This generation
shall not pass away until all these things be accomplished." These words
are clearly intended to answer the disciples' question, "when shall these
things be?" Their meaning is substantially the same as that of Mark 9:1,
and the parallels in Matthew and Luke.
The words immediately preceding them show the
absurdity of applying them to another generation than that of the
apostles: "When YOU SEE THESE THINGS coming to pass, YOU KNOW that he is
nigh, even at the doors. Verily I say UNTO YOU, this generation shall not
pass away," etc.
But not a few expositors presume to nullify the
import of these words by affirming that they are glaringly inconsistent
with what follows in Mark and Matthew: "But of that day or hour knoweth no
one, not even the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."
It is difficult to understand how any
interpreter, uninfluenced by a dogmatic prepossession, can insist on
making one of these statements contradict or exclude the other. But it is
not difficult to see that, when one has it already settled in his mind
that the kingdom of Christ is not yet come, that the "Parousia" is an even
event yet future, and that "the end of the age" is not the close of the
pre-Messianic age, but "the end of the world," such a weight of dogma
effectually obliges him to nullify the simply meaning of words as emphatic
as Jesus ever spoke.
If the language of Mark 13:30, and its parallels
in Matthew and Luke are to be so arbitrarily set aside on such ground we
see not but it is just as proper a procedure to reject the statement of
Jesus's ignorance of the day and the hour, which indeed does not appear in
Luke at all. Why not reject Mark 13:32, which has no parallel in Luke,
rather than verse 30, which appears in all the synoptic gospels? Such an
arbitrary procedure is a two-edged sword which may smite in one direction
as well as another. (Biblical Apocalyptics, pp. 238-245)
On Severing Matthew 24 into Two Sections
"When, however, the one school of interpreters attempt to point out the
dividing line, there are as many differences of opinion as there are
interpreters. In Matt. 24 and 25, for example, the transition from the one
subject to the other is placed by Bengel and others at 24:29; by E.J.
Meyer at verse 35; by Doddridge at verse 36; by Kuinoel at verse 33; by
Eichorn at 25:14, and by Wetstein at 25:31." (Biblical Apocalyptics, p.
217)
On Matthew 26:64
"Matthew reads (xxvi, 64), 'From this time ... ye shall see the Son of man
sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.'
We maintain that this language cannot be naturally interpreted as a
reference to an event belonging to a far distant period of time. It is
something that is to take place from this time onward, and something which
the high priest and his associates are to see.
We quote with great satisfaction the comment of
Gould in the International Critical Commentary on Mark (p. 252): 'This
settles two things: first, that the coming is not a single event, any more
than the sitting on the right hand of power; and second, that it was a
thing which was to begin with the very time of our Lord's departure from
the world. Moreover, the two things, the sitting on the right hand of
power, and the coming are connected in such a way as to mean that he is to
assume power in heaven and exercise it here in the world.
The period beginning with the departure of Jesus
from the world was to be marked by this assumption of heavenly power by
the Christ, and by repeated interferences in crises of the world's
history, of which the destruction of Jerusalem was the first' " (Milton
Terry, Biblical Apocalyptics, pp. 222-223).
|
