What Did Jesus Mean?
Not everything the Lord Jesus said is easy to understand. Here are three of the most difficult statements in His Olivet Discourse.
The Bible is God’s Word. Every single part of it is inspired, authoritative, and important. But it’s fair to admit that not every verse is equally clear. We’ve all stumbled over a particularly opaque passage from time to time. (Incidentally, the existence of difficult Scriptures isn’t necessarily a bad thing; it can be a powerful incentive to prod us into a deeper study of God’s Word.)
The Olivet Discourse is a fascinating and instructive part of Jesus’ teaching, but it also contains sayings that are difficult because either their meaning is hard to pin down or they generate theological conundrums or they have been commonly misinterpreted and misapplied. So here are three of the most difficult, along with explanations:
“This generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place” (Mt. 24:34).
The Difficulty. At first glance, this verse appears to teach that the Tribulation (see “Signs of the Times“) and Second Coming would occur a few decades after the discourse was delivered. Indeed, every other time Jesus used the expression this generation, He appeared to be referring to the Jewish people among whom He lived in the AD 30s. But the details of the Olivet Discourse’s predictions clearly were not fulfilled in the 1st century or any time thereafter. So, was Jesus mistaken about the timing of His prophecy’s fulfillment?
The Explanation. Every text must be interpreted in its own context. The Olivet Discourse deals with predictive, futuristic prophecy; and it is possible that terms and expressions in such a context might take on slightly different shades of significance than they would in nonprophetic contexts.
The key to unraveling this difficulty is to recognize that, throughout the discourse, Jesus was addressing the disciples as if they were representatives of a future Jewish generation. This practice is common in the Bible’s prophetic literature: Old Testament prophets frequently addressed their prophecies to their contemporaries as if that generation would witness the prophecies’ fulfillments. In actuality, those prophecies often would not be fulfilled until centuries later. The fact that Jesus framed the Olivet Discourse in this way is especially evident in Matthew 24:15–21, where He spoke as if His hearers would witness the “‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet,” standing in the Temple (v. 15; cf. Dan. 11:31; 12:11). This prophecy has yet to be fulfilled.
When the Olivet Discourse is approached from this perspective, Matthew 24:34 becomes much clearer. In the immediately preceding verses, Jesus was describing the cosmic signs (disturbances to the sun, moon, and stars) that will accompany His Second Coming (vv. 29–31). He then concluded, “When you see all these things, know that it [the Second Coming] is near—at the doors! Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place” (vv. 33–34).
So, the expression this generation evidently refers to the generation that will witness all the signs described in verses 29–31. That generation will not pass away until all the prophecies included in the Olivet Discourse are literally and historically fulfilled.
“Inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me” (Mt. 25:40).
The Difficulty. The identity of “the least of these My brethren” isn’t immediately clear. Many teachers and preachers have suggested Jesus was referring to all who are underprivileged or disenfranchised, such as the poor, homeless, and needy in every age. Furthermore, Jesus seemed to use the presence or absence of good works as a basis for determining who will enter the Kingdom and who will be cast into hell. Some have concluded that He was teaching a message of salvation by works—which would contradict many other Bible passages that teach salvation by grace through faith alone.
The Explanation. This passage describes a judgment on the Gentile nations that will occur immediately after Jesus’ Second Coming (25:31–33):
When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left.
Those on the Lord’s right go into the Kingdom; those on the left go “into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (v. 41).
The Tribulation—a time of unprecedented hardship and Jewish persecution (24:16–21)—will have just concluded. In this context, then, “the least of these My brethren” probably refers to Jewish people—Jesus’ kinsmen “according to the flesh” (Rom. 9:5)—who will live during the Tribulation. The judgment, then, is based on how Gentiles care for the Jewish people during their time of greatest adversity.
But what about the matter of salvation by works? Does this passage teach that our eternal destinies are ultimately determined by our deeds? No, that’s not the point of this passage. It’s true that the sheep and goats are either rewarded or punished according to their works, but it’s also true that these two groups are represented by different animals (sheep vs. goats) before their works are ever evaluated. And they first are separated into two groups (Mt. 25:32), not based on their works but based on their natures. Their works simply express the deeper, underlying difference in those natures. The “goats” (unsaved Gentiles) demonstrate their unsaved nature by their callous disregard of Jewish suffering during the Tribulation; and the “sheep” (saved Gentiles) demonstrate their redeemed status by the way they care for Jewish people during their hour of greatest need. So, this passage does teach that one’s rewards or punishment will be in proportion to his works; but one’s eternal destiny is determined by his underlying nature (sheep or goat, saved or unsaved).
“But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Mk. 13:32).
The Difficulty. This is one of several passages in which Jesus claimed ignorance about a particular point or subject. But if Jesus is truly divine (as Christianity teaches), then He should be all-knowing (omniscient). How, then, could He have been ignorant about anything?
The Explanation. Most Christian theologians and commentators have recognized that the explanation must have something to do with the limitations Christ embraced as part of the Incarnation (the period from the virgin conception until the resurrection). In the 19th century, kenotic theology arose. According to one school of thought, Jesus voluntarily relinquished His divine attributes at the moment of His Incarnation. While this explanation would seem to solve the problem posed by Mark 13:32, it creates an even bigger theological problem: It implies that, for a while, Jesus ceased to be truly divine. And that idea seems both preposterous and heretical.
So, other theologians offered a modification of kenotic theology: Jesus didn’t relinquish any of His divine attributes but voluntarily surrendered the independent exercise of them. This explanation is a little easier to swallow but still has problems: For one thing, it’s hard to see how even the independent exercise of certain divine attributes could be relinquished while retaining true deity. For another, some New Testament verses seem to imply that Jesus retained omniscience during His earthly ministry (Lk. 6:8; Jn. 2:24–25; 6:70–71; 16:30).
So, the definitive answer to this puzzle remains somewhat of a mystery—as is so often the case with our theological questions about the relationship between Jesus’ divine and human natures. In my opinion, the correct explanation may have something to do with the fact that Jesus, while having access to all knowledge by virtue of His omniscience, nevertheless had to process that knowledge through a physical, unglorified brain—which was, necessarily, limited in capacity. Thus, it would have been possible, at any given moment, for there to be information that Jesus could have summoned to Himself but that was not at that moment present in His physical brain. To me, this sort of an explanation seems to solve the problem plausibly. Whether or not it is the correct explanation, I suppose only God knows.
Regardless, I think we can be quite certain of this fact: Whatever mental limitations the Incarnation may have imposed, they are no longer in effect on this side of Jesus’ resurrection, ascension, and exaltation.
