What other "comings" are mentioned in Matthew before chapter 24?

If the disciples asked Jesus about the sign of His coming in Matthew 24, then earlier chapters of Matthew 24 have to show what coming they referred to.  Are there references to the yet-future second coming of Jesus before Matthew 24?  

Chapter 10 continues to speak of Him coming not to send peace but a sword. as well as setting a man at variance with his father (Matt 10:34-35).

But chapter 16 mentions a coming that is worthy of consideration, Is it the yet future second coming or something else?

Matthew 16:27-28 KJV For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. (28) Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Futurists agree this is the yet future second coming. However, verse 28 says that some of the people standing there would not have tasted death, as the CEV bible says,

Matthew 16:27-28 CEV The Son of Man will soon come in the glory of his Father and with his angels to reward all people for what they have done. (28) I promise you that some of those standing here will not die before they see the Son of Man coming with his kingdom.

This cannot be the second coming since it was to occur in their lifetimes.

But others told me it referred to the very next chapter where Jesus was transfigured before them in a way that he is seen in Revelation 1 with face like the sun, etc. They claim this experience only one week after the words at the end of Matthew 16 was a shadow and indication of how He will indeed come in the yet future second coming.

Matthew 17:1-2 KJV And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, (2) And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.

Jesus specifically noted that some of them would still be alive when He would come. That was a key point in His words. That meant that some would not be alive. If He referred to something that took place a week later, that statement would be ridiculous. The listeners either were too old and would only possibly survive another week, or were too sick that Jesus had to assure them they would not die within a week.

Furthermore, if that does not convince one Jesus was not referring to the transfiguration, we read similar words spoken to Caiaphas who was not there at the transfiguration:

Matthew 26:63-64 KJV But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. (64) Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Caiaphas was told he would personally see the Son of man coming in the clouds of Heaven.

But some might ask why Jesus spoke of a first century coming in judgment when He said, "The Son of Man will soon come in the glory of his Father and with his angels to reward all people for what they have done. (Matthew 16:27 CEV)"

Who does "all people" refer to? Context must be considered in order to use a proper hermeneutic and learn the answer. Since verse 28 obviously cannot refer to anything but the AD70 coming in judgment due to the language used describing people still alive, verse 27 has to fit that scenario. However, judging all people and giving them rewards for what they have done does not have to refer to a white throne judgment in which literally everyone who was ever born since Adam will be judged. It is simply saying everyone in that generation of Israel at the the time of the judgment will receive judgment by either their destruction or, as in the case of the Christians, their safety from such destruction. It is a fact that the early church understood Matthew 24's coming of Jesus as the time when the Romans came to destroy the city.


Sometimes Hermeneutics requires us to find support for an interpretation of scripture in history. History is not always flawless, for much of it is written simply to support the bias and belief of the historian who wrote it.

But we do have history that reveals when the Roman armies surrounded the city the Christians took this as fulfillment of Jesus' words as follows:

Matthew 24:15-17 KJV 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:) (16) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: (17) Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:

Luke's account of the same event used other words to help us narrow down more precisely what Jesus meant here.

Luke 21:20-21 KJV And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. (21) Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

They did indeed flee Jerusalem and not a Christian was destroyed in the destruction that occurred 3.5 years later in AD70.

Eusebius wrote this history in AD325:

"But the people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town of Perea called Pella. " (History of the Church 3:5:3)

"The whole body, however, of the church at Jerusalem, having been commanded by a divine revelation, given to men of approved piety there before the war, removed from the city, and dwelt at a certain town beyond the Jordan, called Pella. Here those that believed in Christ, having removed from Jerusalem, as if holy men had entirely abandoned the royal city itself, and the whole land of Judea; the divine justice, for their crimes against Christ and his apostles finally overtook them, totally destroying the whole generation of these evildoers form the earth. (Eusebius, 3:5.)

"After all those who believed in Christ had generally come to live in Perea, in a city called Pella of the Decapolis of which it is written in the Gospel and which is situated in the neighborhood of the region of Batanaea and Basanitis, Ebion's preaching originated here after they had moved to this place and had lived there." (Panarion 30:2)

"For when the city was about to be captured and sacked by the Romans, all the disciples were warned beforehand by an angel to remove from the city, doomed as it was to utter destruction. On migrating from it they settled at Pella, the town already indicated, across the Jordan. It is said to belong to Decapolis (de Mens. et Pond., 15).

"Now this sect of Nazarenes exists in Beroea in Coele-Syria, and in Decapolis in the district of Pella, and in Kochaba of Basanitis-- called Kohoraba in Hebrew. For thence it originated after the migration from Jerusalem of all the disciples who resided at Pella, Christ having instructed them to leave Jerusalem and retire from it on account of the impending siege. It was owing to this counsel that they went away, as I have said, to reside for a while at Pella" (Haer 29:7).

"For when all who believed in Christ had settled down about that time in Peraea, the majority of the emigrants taking up their abode at Pella, a town belonging to the Decapolis mentioned in the Gospel, near Batanea and the district to Basanitis, Ebion got his excuse and opportunity. At first their abode was Kochaba, a village in the district of Carnaim, Arnem, and Astaroth, in the region of Basanitis, according to the information we have received. But I have spoken, in other connections and with regard to other heresies, of the locality of Kochaba and Arabia (Haer 30:2)... "[The Ebionites] spring for the most part from Batanea ... and Paneas, as well as from Moabitis and Cochaba in Basanitis on the other side of Adraa" (Haer 30:18).

Epiphanius wrote the same thing in the year AD375.

"The Nazoraean sect exists in Beroea near Coele Syria, in the Decapolis near the region of Pella, and in Bashan in the place called Cocaba, which in Hebrew is called Chochabe. That is where the sect began, when all the disciples were living in Pella after they moved from Jerusalem, since Christ told them to leave Jerusalem and withdraw because it was about to be besieged. For this reason they settled in Peraea and there, as I said, they lived. This is where the Nazoraean sect began." (Panarion 29:7:7-8)

"Their sect began after the capture of Jerusalem. For when all those who believed in Christ settled at that time for the most part in Peraea, in a city called Pella belonging to the Decapolis mentioned in the gospel, which is next to Batanaea and the land of Bashan, then they moved there and stayed.." (Panarion 30:2:7)

Had these Christians felt Matt 24:15 did not refer to the Romans in Jerusalem, they would not have fled the city and would have died! Who should we believe more? Should we agree with these early Christians and understand Matt 24 referred to the days before AD70, while some of these believers were alive when Jesus first uttered that command, or futurists removed from their day by 2,000 years? Proper hermeneutics would also help us answer that question.

The writing of Pseudo-Clementines around the 2nd or 3rd century says:

"Subsequently also an evident proof of this great mystery is supplied in the fact, that every one who, believing in this Prophet who had been foretold by Moses, is baptized in His name, shall be kept unhurt from the destruction of war which impends over the unbelieving nation, and the place itself; but that those who do not believe shall be made exiles from their place and kingdom, that even against their will they may understand and obey the will of God." (Recognitions 1:39:3)

Eisegesis is the only conclusion we can come to in determining why futurists would read a yet future coming of Jesus in these Matthew 10:23 and 16:28. They simply want the passages to read about a future coming so as to not upset their doctrinal apple carts. The overwhelming plainness and obvious conclusion is simply a coming in the lifetimes of the people of that day.

Matthew 18:11 speaks of the Son come to save that which was lost.

And the next reference to Jesus coming is in the parable of the vineyard where Jesus said the lord would "come" and deal with the wicked husbandmen, that we already dealt with earlier.

This is the sort of analysis we must make in reading Matthew 24:3 when determining what coming that their question about His coming referred to. I cannot find one single reference before Matt 24:3 that would refer to the yet future coming of Jesus, although I believe other parts of the bible do indeed refer to that coming. Everything in Matthew before chapter 24 speaks of a coming of judgment in the lifetimes of the people alive at that time, if not about various comings to bring peace through the Gospel, etc.


Matthew 24 continued showing that Jesus looked into the eyes of the people listening to Him and told them that they would personally see the events He foretold.

Matthew 24:4-13 KJV And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. (5) For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. (6) And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. (7) For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. (8) All these are the beginning of sorrows. (9) Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake. (10) And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another. (11) And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. (12) And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. (13) But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

Use hermeneutics and look for the plain reading and obvious interpretation. Ask yourself if Jesus referred to them, personally, or to people who would not live until 2,000 years later. Why refer to people not yet born by saying "You" and "ye" to the people standing there? Some respond saying Peter told the people standing there that they had a promise for them and their children, and that includes people 2,000 years later in our day (Acts 2:39)! Of course! But it included the people who heard Peter as well.

Where did Jesus ever say "you" and not refer to the people standing there, or at least include them in a general statement that would apply to us today as well? For them to be at least INCLUDED in the people who would experience the events he listed, they would have to be alive when those events come to pass! If this is a yet future series of events, then they cannot be included, and Jesus spoke nonsense in speaking to them in first person personal pronouns like "you" and "ye".

What hermeneutic would tell us otherwise?


Then there is the reference to Matthew 13 which mentions "the end of the world", using the same Greek words as Matthew 24. 

Matthew 13:37-43 KJV  He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;  (38)  The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;  (39)  The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.  (40)  As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.  (41)  The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;  (42)  And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.  (43)  Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

If Matthew 13 is speaking of the yet-future coming of the Lord at the end of the world, then perhaps this is what the disciples had in mind when they asked Jesus about the end of the world in Matthew 24.  Let us notice the details given in Matthew 13.  We do not read of a "left behind" sort of scenario where the saints are removed in the rapture, and the sinners are left behind to suffer a futurist great tribulation in Matthew 13.  We read the sinners are removed first.  This is destruction that removes sinners, and the saints remain alive and well.  The tares rare removed and burned.  The saints remain alive and shine forth in the Kingdom.

This is another AD70 reference.  The sinners are destroyed in the destruction of Jerusalem, and the saints are left alive and well.

The parable that was given before this interpretation of that parable was as follows:

Matthew 13:24-30 KJV  Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:  (25)  But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.  (26)  But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.  (27)  So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?  (28)  He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?  (29)  But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.  (30)  Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

This has led some to feel that the gathering into barns does not make sense if it is an AD70 issue.  How can those in the Kingdom be gathered into the Kingdom?  But notice that Jesus did not speak of a gathering  into the Kingdom as His interpretation.  He simply said the sinners are removed from the Kingdom and the saints remain and shine in it.  Sometimes we take details of a parable, like gathering into a barn, and think of all the meanings that might have, when Jesus actually did not focus on that detail in His interpretation.  He focused on the simple thought that tares are gone and wheat remains.  He did not interpret that parable to say the saints are gathered into anything.    Read it again:

Matthew 13:41  The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;  (42)  And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.  (43)  Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

So, even the reference to the "end of the world" in Matthew 13 does not show anything about a rapture before destruction, but simply sinners removed and saints remaining.




The next issue of controversy in Matthew 24 is the preaching of the Gospel to all the world before the end.

Matthew 24:14 KJV And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

The disciples asked about the "end". Jesus said events would occur before "the end" but they were not to think "the end" had arrived when they saw those events.

Matthew 24:6 KJV And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.

He spoke of enduring to the "end".

Matthew 24:13 KJV But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

And then verse 14 occurs which futurists claim has not been fulfilled yet, showing us the coming of verse 3 is yet future.

We already referenced Matthew 10. But that chapter mentions the same thing as Matt 24.

Matthew 10:22 KJV And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

We do read about the end of the world here:

Matthew 13:39-40 KJV The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. (40) As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

Matthew 13:49 KJV So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,

"World" in these verses as well as Matthew 24:3 is translated from the Greek word "Aion", from which we derive the English word EON, which is an AGE. So, the end of the world is referring to the end of the age. An age was ending!

Notice that Matthew 10 spoke of tares being gathered and burned in the fire at the "end of the world," causing the what to be "left behind." Contrary to popular futurist prophecy today, the sinners/TARES are removed first, and the saints/WHEAT are left behind  alive and well.

Jesus clarified things:

Matthew 13:30 KJV Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.

Futurist prophecy teaches the church is raptured first and then the sinners are burned. Jesus did not teach this.

In fact, proper hermeneutics requires us to refer to all references of judgment and see what occurs in sequence first.

Hebrews 12:25-27 KJV See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven: (26) Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. (27) And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.

Hebrews teaches the removal of sinners in destruction so that the saints will be left behind remaining, alive and well.

But the reference to the gospel going forth to the whole world so the end might come is something that we find involves an understanding that the bible writers used more than once, and shows this was indeed fulfilled before the writing of the New Testament was completed!

Colossians 1:5-6 KJV For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel; (6) Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:

The gospel was said by Paul to have come to the Colossians as well as all the world!

Colossians 1:23 KJV If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

Paul repeated it again and said the gospel was already preached to every creature under heaven by the time Paul wrote Colossians. This can only mean one thing. the whole world was understood by the biblical writers as referring to the then-known world of the Roman empire! This is also found in the Gospels.

Luke 2:1 KJV And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.

Did Caesar tax the North American Indians across the ocean? It says "all the world should be taxed." So, if this indeed was a manner of speaking about the then-known world of the Roman empire, could not Matthew 24 be referring to that? Proper hermeneutics must include taking words that were intended to be a metaphor as a metaphor, or words intended to be a manner of speaking of the then-known world as indeed speaking of the then-known world. Was this the intention of Matt. 24 or not?

So far, we found Matthew 24 could not be speaking about the yet future coming of Jesus, but a coming of judgment in the lifetime of the people who heard Him speak of it. And this concept of the then-known world perfectly fits in with what Paul said in his writings about the gospel having already gone to all the world. This shows that the association of the Gospel and its ministry to all the world indeed does require realization that it already occurred before AD70.



Continued... (click here).