“Which Way Are We Coming?” Interpretive Issues in Matthew 24 (v.30)

Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (ESV)

If you read this and most other translations, you can easily come to a mis-understanding of what the text is actually saying. In English, this verse appears to say that the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven. As this lends itself to our imagination, we picture people on Earth gazing up at the sky at some supernatural apparition—the sign of the Son of Man. But there is a better and more likely interpretation of this phrase. To understand it, we need to ask ourselves, what, exactly, is “in heaven”? In Greek, this can more naturally (and in light of the second half of this verse, which I’ll come to, more likely does) refer to the location of the Son of Man, rather than to the sign. The sign simply appears, and the location of its appearing is not disclosed.

How does the second half of the verse support this interpretation? Again, if we just read the English, and particularly if we do not read it in the light of other Scriptural texts to which it refers, we may let our imaginations get the better of us. We picture Jesus Christ, robed in brilliant light, riding the clouds of heaven like a chariot, descending to Earth on the last day with a host of his angelic army following at his back.

But let’s think biblically here instead of letting our creative natures run wild. To what is this verse referring? The Son of Man on the clouds of Heaven refers, in fact, to Daniel 7:13-14.

I saw in the night visions,
and behold, with the clouds of heaven
there came one like a son of man,
and he came to the Ancient of Days
and was presented before him.
And to him was given dominion
and glory and a kingdom,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
should serve him;
his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
which shall not pass away,
and his kingdom one
that shall not be destroyed.

I have a couple observations about this. First, there should be no doubt that Matthew 24:30 is a direct reference to Daniel 7:13. Both speak of the Son of Man “coming” on the clouds of heaven; both speak of the Son of Man’s power and glory. Matthew 24 describes the fulfillment of Daniel 7.

So this is Christ’s second coming, right?

The problem is when we consider the direction the Son is “coming.” In English, when we say “come,” we automatically assume that the subject is travelling in our direction. Hence our tendency to interpret Matthew 24:30 as Christ “coming” down to Earth. But we need to consider the perspective of Daniel and the purpose of Matthew.
Which way is the Son of Man coming in the texts? Daniel views his visions from a high heavenly vantage point. In Daniel 7, the Son is coming to the Ancient of Days. In proper English, from an earthly perspective, the text tells us that Christ is really going, not coming. So why does Matthew say “coming”? Matthew is quoting Daniel almost word for word. Since Daniel (viewing things from a heavenly vantage point) says “coming,” Matthew uses the same word to make the reference explicit. That may make the direction of movement more obscure, but that is only if one isn’t aware of Daniel 7.

Let’s compare this with a conflation of two other passages—

Matthew 28:16-20 and Acts 1:9.

Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight.

Sound familiar? All of these passages are speaking of Jesus Christ going to the Father’s right hand on the clouds. I don’t think there can be much doubt. Matthew 24:30 is speaking not of Christ’s second coming to Earth at the end of history (which is yet to come) but of his ascension to the right hand of the Father (which happened at a particular point in history), where he rules both Heaven and Earth.

So in light of this, what is the first half of the verse saying? It is Jesus’ promise to his listeners that they will be given a sign that the Son of Man is in Heaven—that he has gone to the right hand of the Father, and that he rules. Of course, the rest of Matthew 24 must be read with this in mind. And we should note that the tribulation comes before this sign.

While we should not confuse the sign with that which is signified (the sign is the evidence of a state that is already in effect), most often sign and signified are temporally linked. One closely follows the other in time and space. From this, we may infer (though not with complete confidence from this text), that since the signified (ascension and rule) occurred two thousand years ago, the event of the sign itself also is history.

Who will be “Left Behind”? — Part 2

It can be easy to think of being “left behind” as a good thing, considering the Greek (aphietai) can also mean released, forgiven, etc. It can, of course, also quite literally mean to be left alone and abandoned. After some thought, I’ve decided on the latter interpretation in the context of Matthew 24. The unbelievers will be abandoned.

And the believer? “Taken away” is not such a good translation for “paralambanetai.” It misses so much. The real sense of the word is more like “taken in.” It emphasizes status rather than location. It is a covenantal word, describing how the believer is received by God and identified with Christ. This cannot be said of the unbeliever.

In fact, there is virtually no negative connotation possible for the word. It certainly does not mean “swept away.” The closest one might get is to translate it as “to take over or receive jurisdiction over,” as in the case of a prisoner or slave. But then, that describes the Christian just as well. The believer is the doulos (bondservant) of Jesus Christ.

Who will be “Left Behind”? — Part 1

So. Let’s look at this whole concept of being “Left Behind.” The premise is that at the rapture … er, sorry, The Rapture … believers in Christ will be taken away (to meet the Lord in the air), and the unbelievers will be “left behind.” After all, isn’t that what Matthew 24 says? If you listen to Tim LaHaye, you’d think it was a settled issue. Clear as crystal.

But actually there are two views on this.

Jesus says that this event will be like “in the days of Noah.” In Noah’s day, people were going along their merry little lives until Noah entered the ark. And suddenly, the flood came and “swept them all them away!” So in the same way, in the event Jesus is describing, two people will be in the field. One will be “taken away” and one left.

But who’s getting taken? If we look to the parallel illustration of Noah and the flood this way:

Noah into the ark = those left behind (or alone)
Everyone else swept away = those taken away

… we may actually conclude that those who were making merry in Noah’s day were taken, while Noah was left. Likewise, it would then be the unbeliever in Jesus’ warning that is being taken, not Christians being raptured. The believers are left. This may further be supported by the connotations of forgiveness, peace, and pardon that the Greek word translated as “left behind” can sometimes have.

All in all, a fairly convincing reading. It makes perfect sense in English translations, while to reverse the roles seems odd. This is the position to which many preterist interpreters subscribe. I was one of them, oh … last week. However …

On closer examination, I’m not so convinced of this interpretation after all. I’ll elaborate on why that is in the next article, to be added shortly.