Luke Chapter 21
Starts with the widows mites.
2021 - 1 Jesus looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the offering box, 2 and he saw a poor widow put in two small copper coins. [Luk 21:1-2 ESV]
It doesn't look like I have spent time on this little story so far. I note that near the very end of the last chapter, where Jesus singles out the scribes - contrasted with the Pharisees - for their own condemnation, and he says they "devour widows' houses". Then right away in this chapter, we see the story of the widow's mites. I have always seen this presented as a story of the "best" sort of giving. I have seen it used to recommend sacrificial giving, to the point of not having enough left after giving to pay your bills that month, and therefore an act of supreme trust for God to provide. But when coupled with that last bit, in Luke 20, couldn't this be seen as an example of the kind of "devouring" that Jesus was talking about? This widow was destitute, and yet compelled to give "out of her poverty". Jesus does not call her blessed for what she is doing, but says her gift is more, because these two mites are vital to her survival while the much larger offerings of the rich won't really be missed that much. They aren't risking hunger in order to contribute thousands, but this widow is risking that to put in her two mites. BUT ALSO, the footnote in TCR ESV is that these copper coins - leptons - were each worth 1/128th of a denarius, which is a days pay for a laborer. A day's pay would feed the laborer and his family for a day - and not much beyond that. So this offering would not have fed this widow that day. The BLB definition of lepton is a brass coin worth about 1/5th of a cent. In other places, it talks about a penny's worth of bread, so these two coins would not even have bought her a small loaf of bread that day. So...maybe - I think certainly - Jesus point is that in her heart, despite her poverty, she was determined to give to the treasury. She wanted to put in something at least. This was not going to be the difference in eating or not eating that day. It wouldn't have bought any food anyway. But it was perhaps all she had beyond what she needed to eat meagerly that day. For her, even this almost valueless offering represented a lot. She gave ALL the extra she had, not just a tithe out of an abundance. She was foregoing saving up for tomorrow and trusting God for tomorrow. In this attitude, her offering represented great trust and sacrifice. But it was not about starving in order to give!!!
A very long post, but maybe I can shorten it - or reference the website in a FB post - for a perspective on this story.
2020 - I want to re-do the walk through of these verses, and update them to what I think now, a year later. So, what is in between the ***'s is from 2019, and what follows that is 2020, and so marked.
2021 - I note this year that 21 is the last chapter before the Passover meal with the Apostles. The last chapter in which Jesus addresses the Gentiles - speaks publicly. In the rest, he is speaking directly to his Apostles, or he is on trial and speaking before unqualified judges, and fulfilling OT prophecy of the Messiah as suffering servant. So these are his last words to the Gentiles. And these words include the parallel passage to Matt 24.
******
Then this verse:
6 "As for these things that you see, the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down." [Luk 21:6 ESV]
The narrative takes a completely different direction at this point. Things change from condemnation of the present to prophecy of the future.
In vs 7, two questions are asked by those who hear him say this about the temple:
7 And they asked him, "Teacher, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when these things are about to take place?" [Luk 21:7 ESV]
First, when will these things be, and what will be the sign that they are about to take place. Only a subtle difference in the questions. "When" was probably a general question. Tomorrow? Our generation? A thousand years from now? And the second question implies that they thought it was at least a ways off, because they wanted to know what to look out for, they wanted a "signal" that this prophecy was about to be fulfilled. So a general "when" and then the observable events immediately prior to it really happening. BUT, the key, to me at least, is that these two questions in Luke are about the one event. The stones being un-stacked. There is no question about the end of the age or the time of Jesus' return. So...there should only be a 1/3rd overlap with Mt 24....
Jesus answer tells them not to worry, it is going to be a while yet. This is shown in that he tells them not to listen to those who show up saying "The time is at hand". Also that every war that pops up is not to be interpreted as one of the signs. He tells them not to listen to prognosticators and not to interpret the ongoing events of history as signs. Note also that it is likely that only the apostle John lived to see 70 AD.
(((One could argue here that Jesus' answer does not refer to the physical buildings that were standing there, but to his own body. He had just told them that he was a cornerstone, he was a building, and now he talks about some buildings being torn completely down. Jesus had a history of sounding literal when he was speaking spiritually - as in the boat when he said bread and meant anything but bread. In that case it should have been obvious what he was NOT talking about. Here, I don't know...but I think we have the hindsight to see that he did mean the physical buildings of Jerusalem.)))
Verse 11 tells what the signs will be:
11 There will be great earthquakes, and in various places famines and pestilences. And there will be terrors and great signs from heaven. [Luk 21:11 ESV] Sixth seal is a great earthquake. Then you have the plants and crops and water being tainted. Terrors? Not sure what those are about, but I wonder how often that word is used in the NT? Or by Jesus himself? And then the one that can't be faked, even by Lucifer himself. Great signs from heaven. What exactly is that referring to? I don't think Revelation tells us that end time events kick off with a sign from heaven. I wonder if the rapture is that sign? I wonder if the big battle between Satan the power of the air, and the angels of God pulling the raptured through it all to heaven is the sign?
He continues in vs 12....BUT, before all this...So a lot of other things have to happen before the signs of the end show up. Before all this comes persecution. Lots and lots of persecution. Civil authorities, governments will persecute Christianity. Being arrested for His sake is to be viewed as opportunity, not as punishment, and he will give those so persecuted the very words they are to say. It says some will be "put to death" then almost immediately says "not a hair...will perish". Body and soul, surely. Then "by endurance, you will gain your lives." This sounds like trib and great trib. The 144,000 maybe. Will there be signs in heaven at the end of Great Trib, just before Jesus returns? Perhaps when he comes he will dismantle the temple that exists at that time, the one used to worship Anti-Christ, and will set up a new one with himself as it's cornerstone, upon it's throne. I mean, the wailing wall has stones on top of stones. That is what it is. So when Jesus said exactly specifically these words: 6 "...the days will come when there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down." [Luk 21:6b ESV], how can we say his words have yet been fulfilled?
Hmm....I just convinced myself that none of this is about 70 AD. None of these things in Luke 21 are about 70 AD. These are end times signs, and very possibly post Great Trib signs.
Then this verse, signalling another change in the time he is talking about. This starts with "But..." as vs 12 started with "But...":
20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. [Luk 21:20 ESV]
I think this was a lot nearer time. This was coming in that generation. Some would see it. I think the "not one stone on another" was what they asked about, and it is what he was answering about in vss 8-19, which is the end of Great Trib. And then he gives them some additional information beginning in vs 20. Information not about the temple buildings but about the city of Jerusalem itself.
vs 21 give advice contrary to what the OT prophets and Revelation itself says will happen in the end times. At the end, the Jews will all return to Jerusalem. This tells them to get away and not look back. This is not about the end!!! This is about 70 AD.
vs 22 confirms it and Jesus tells them when he is talking about now:
22 for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. [Luk 21:22 ESV]
This is God's vengeance on the city, on the sons who killed the prophets, described in Matt 23. Though Luke doesn't emphasize it as much, surely they are talking of the same few hours in Jesus' life, and the same words spoken. This is about judgement on Israel, NOT judgement of the whole world. This time of judgement against Israel will continue until "the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled", and following that will come signs in the sun and moon - these are end times signs and can only come from God, and THESE SIGNS are the signs of the end of the world and the destruction of the temple that then is...wherever it is.
This vs:
27 And then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. [Luk 21:27 ESV]
Goes right with it. Jesus coming to establish the Millennial, NOT the rapture! The redemption that draweth nigh is the redemption, finally, of Israel. NOT the world. We will be switching back to the Sinai Covenant as the New Covenant will have been fulfilled by the rapture.
This verse:
35 For it will come upon all who dwell on the face of the whole earth. [Luk 21:35 ESV]
This is about the end of Great Trib. And it will be only Jews who see this. The church will be out by then. Those who stand before the Son of Man will be the Jews who survive Great Trib and proceed alive into Jerusalem and see Jesus sitting on the physical throne of David.
******
Here is the 2020 version:
Luke is writing to Gentiles. That has been coming up a lot lately in my reading. So that is the first thing to keep in mind here. Here, as in Matthew, Jesus has just said the stones will be un-stacked. That happens in 70 AD. That does not happen in trib or great trib. That does not happen in the Millennial. So, if this is literal at all, then Jesus is talking about the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. Luke only records two questions, and they are both about the same thing. When will these stones be un-stacked, and what is the sign that says it is imminent? That is all Luke records, and maybe that is all Luke intends to inform his readers about. I am going to be very literal about this and assume Luke isn't going to talk about the second coming at the end of the Millennial, nor about the rapture before or early in the Tribulation. Luke is only going to talk about the total destruction of the Temple. Remember that half a chapter ago, Jesus talked about chief cornerstones and rebuilding. We can surely say that the "physical marker" that the new construction was beginning was the annihilation of the most visible symbol of the old construction.
vvs 8,9 are pretty generic. They are more of a "what not to get excited about" introduction before the real answers come. False prophets, doomsayers, end-of-the-world announcers - we are to ignore all these. They don't mean it's the end. They are irrelevant as indicators of anything but false prophets and Satan's deceptions. Same with wars, rumors of wars, even of American Civil wars...these are not indicators, they are the normal advancement of history, the way of all men. Jesus says "the end will not be at once". I think he was telling them they need not go into hiding when he died, because there would be an interval before the Temple was destroyed.
My Bible puts vvs 10-19 in their own paragraph titled "Jesus Foretells Wars and Persecution". Luke didn't put in this paragraph break, the ESV translators did. In the NASB, there is no break until after vs 19. The NKJV has no paragraph breaks at all, only chapter breaks. We should note that vs 10 begins with "Then he said to them..." So I think it is fair to say that Luke is separating the dismissal of normal events from what is about to be said. Luke sees this as a new paragraph. So what does it say?
Vss 10, 11 move from a very general warning to a more emphatic prediction of coming events. There will be conflicts/wars between nations. People at war. There will also be natural disasters. Earthquakes, famine, and pestilence either as consequences of natural disasters (probably this) or as isolated events. We surely see some of these too. Then this last phrase: "...there will be terrors and great signs from heaven." It has become an axiom of mine that heaven is the realm of God and God alone. Satan can manipulate and counterfeit and fake all kinds of things on this world and in the sky, but he can NOT do things in the heavens. The sun going dark, stars falling, things like this are signs strictly from God and Satan cannot counterfeit these. So...what about this word used here for heaven?
As used here, the word translated heaven is Strong's G3772. It is used 274 times in 256 verses in the NASB New Testament. That is a lot of verses to look up. So I am going on to Revelation, to see if this is the word used when then sun does turn black and so on. BUT, as I began to look at this I found these two verses really early: 16 And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; 17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased." [Mat 3:16-17 ESV] Seems to me that the Holy Spirit would descend not from the sky, but from heaven itself. God is in that third heaven, and his voice would come from there. So these sure seem to indicate that the heaven Luke is using is the third heaven, where only God can place signs.
Here are some from Revelation: 12 The one who conquers, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God. Never shall he go out of it, and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name. [Rev 3:12 ESV]
1 After this I looked, and behold, a door standing open in heaven! And the first voice, which I had heard speaking to me like a trumpet, said, "Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this." 2 At once I was in the Spirit, and behold, a throne stood in heaven, with one seated on the throne. [Rev 4:1-2 ESV]
13 and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. 14 The sky vanished like a scroll that is being rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. [Rev 6:13-14 ESV]
This is not how I wanted it to come out. Not much doubt that we're talking about the heaven where only God works. So we have to conclude that Luke is saying that Jesus said there would be signs from heaven before the Temple falls - that's how we have to read it if we are going to stay completely literal. I am not aware of any such signs leading up to 70 AD. BUT, with just a little looking I found this article: https://www.romaneclipse.com/single-post/2017/10/10/Sword-Star-seen-over-Jerusalem-70-AD Talks about a "sword star" that Josephus talks about over Jerusalem in 70 AD. A sign possibly commemorated on a Roman coin minted three years later on the back of a coin showing the likeness of Titus on the front. Titus. The one who destroyed Jerusalem. So let's go with that for now and say that at least one sign did appear in the heavens that only God could have put there in 70 AD.
2021 - This sign is not referenced in the Bible specifically, but also, the Bible has no account at all of the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. John is the only apostle that wrote after that time, so far as I know, and he doesn't mention it at all, instead writing about Trib and Great Trib. Why would John not mention it? Next big question is whether we are going to throw out the rest of the interpretation because we don't know of any pre-70 signs from heaven? Looked up "terrors". Only used once in the NT, in this verse. Just means things that cause fright. A pretty generic term as far as I can tell. Looked up "signs". This word is used 77 times in the KJV. It is always something of unique significance, setting it apart from all other things. It is what I would call an unmistakable indicator. I looked at all the ways Luke uses the word. Luke first uses it at Jesus' birth, saying the "sign" will be a child wrapped in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger. So not all signs are in heaven. Luke also says this: 16 while others, to test him, kept seeking from him a sign from heaven. [Luk 11:16 ESV]. So in this sense, the sign would be something that only heaven's power - God's power - could bring about, without necessarily meaning that the sign was something visible in the sky. Luke 21:11 could be using it in this sense. He talks about the city being compassed about and that being a sign that people should flee. Jesus predicted this and it came to pass. So the origin of this "sign" would be heaven. This also is a confirmation that signs from heaven preceded 70 AD, and this one does have Biblical confirmation. In fact, this sign is specifically mentioned in vs. 20. This is what Jesus was talking about. He actually names the sign from heaven that they are to look for. OH!!! It also says sign FROM heaven, not sign IN heaven!!! Looking ahead, as prompted by the list of Luke's use of the word "signs", we get this verse: 25 "And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth distress of nations in perplexity because of the roaring of the sea and the waves, [Luk 21:25 ESV]. There is no doubt here about where the signs will be. This is not about earthly signs, but about heavenly. But when you read the rest of that paragraph, Luke tells us - in red - specifically that it is about the time when "...they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud...", which is the end of Great Tribulation. This will be the sign of his coming, not of 70 AD. So I think the first use of "signs form heaven", meaning things that no human could have predicted or known, is the one that applies to vs 11, and keeps us pre-70 AD in the things that the apostles are being told. Further, we know from Matthew 24 that these were not "public" words, but things he said to his apostles on the Mount of Olives, after they had left Jerusalem that day. ---Spent a long time in 2021 on this little paragraph. The result is even more corroboration that Jesus is speaking of 70 AD through vs 24, and begins a new topic in vs 25.
Beginning in vs 12, we go backwards. "But before all this..." So taking it all literally, the things described next are going to take place between about 30 AD and 70 AD. Let's see if it fits there. Through vs 19, Jesus talks about persecution and how to handle it. He is talking to his disciples - possibly only his apostles. All of his apostles other than John were dead by 70 AD. All of Paul's letters are written and circulating by 70 AD. So all the persecution described in the New Testament - outside of Revelation - will take place before the Temple is destroyed. So we're still ok with this being a literal reference to 70 AD, and NOT to Trib and Great Trib.
My ESV has another subject break before vs 20, and this is also where the NASB puts in a chapter break. Vs 20 starts with "But...", which I pretty much agree signifies a subject break. And sure enough, we leave the topic of persecution in the meantime and return to predicted events. Here is vs 20, because it is important:
20 "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. [Luk 21:20 ESV]
Titus, and the Roman army, surrounded Jerusalem in 70 AD, besieged it, conquered it, and razed it to the ground. Desolation is the right word for what happened. This is NOT what will happen at the end of the Millennial when the Antichrist and his army surround Jerusalem. Jesus will destroy that army with a word. And at the end of Great Trib, the battle is at Armageddon, way north of Jerusalem. It won't be surrounded at all at that time. So this MUST be talking about 70 AD!!! And if that is so here, beyond a doubt as I think it certainly is, then when these same words are used in Matthew 24, this is what is being described!
2021 - I have another note somewhere, likely on Matt 24, where I saw a YouTube video of a guy saying that shortly before 70 AD, some guy came down to Jerusalem with an army from Syria - at the behest of Rome - and surrounded Jerusalem for a short time. He inexplicably broke camp and left, and was pursued by zealots from Jerusalem and routed. These events were interpreted by Christians living in Jerusalem at the time as the fulfillment of this prophecy. This explained how they were to escape, though the city was surrounded. I need to find that reference and include it, and the link to the video, because it had the sources of this information.
If you're outside the city, don't come back. If you're inside and can get out, then get out. (It was a long siege. Perhaps some did escape.) Everyone is to stay away. Why?
Vs 22: 22 for these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written. [Luk 21:22 ESV] What vengeance? I think it refers to this:
2 Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and cry to her that her warfare is ended, that her iniquity is pardoned, that she has received from the LORD's hand double for all her sins. [Isa 40:2 ESV]
18 But first I will doubly repay their iniquity and their sin, because they have polluted my land with the carcasses of their detestable idols, and have filled my inheritance with their abominations." [Jer 16:18 ESV]
18 Let those be put to shame who persecute me, but let me not be put to shame; let them be dismayed, but let me not be dismayed; bring upon them the day of disaster; destroy them with double destruction! [Jer 17:18 ESV]
26 Still the LORD did not turn from the burning of his great wrath, by which his anger was kindled against Judah, because of all the provocations with which Manasseh had provoked him. 27 And the LORD said, "I will remove Judah also out of my sight, as I have removed Israel, and I will cast off this city that I have chosen, Jerusalem, and the house of which I said, My name shall be there." [2Ki 23:26-27 ESV]
But how was this "double punishment" to be measured? I think the answer was in 2Ki 23:26-27. The city and the temple being destroyed was the measure. This was to happen twice. And that is exactly what happened. The temple of Solomon, the first temple, was destroyed and Jerusalem desolated in 586 BC by Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon. In 70 AD, the restored temple, and the city of Jerusalem, are again destroyed, this time by Titus of Rome. Not one stone was left upon another.
So with all this as backup, I think the "fulfilling" that Jesus references is the second fall of Jerusalem.
And look how prophetic vs 24 is:
24 They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. [Luk 21:24 ESV]
This is what happened. Rome made it illegal for Jews to come within sight of Jerusalem after this. They built their own city there and named it a different name. Jews were scattered all over everywhere. That's where Palestinians came from was during this time. No Jews allowed = trampled by the Gentiles. This is about 70 AD. How could it possibly be interpreted otherwise.
In verse 25 Luke begins to give us answers to the questions that are only related by Matthew. Jesus talks about signs in the heavens as portents to a specific event. He names the event. He is no longer talking about 70 AD. Verse 24 ended with the fulfilling of the times of the Gentiles. And after that, vs 25. We are way out there now. Jesus, like all the rest, skips over all the events of Gentile history and moves from 70 AD to end times. They all do this. Note this, and realize how lucky you are to be grafted into the true olive tree. We are a graft, we are not part of the "real" olive. Vss 25-28 are a 50,000' view of Trib and Great Trib, which end with Jesus coming in a cloud, with his army, and conquering Antichrist on the plains of Megiddo, and ushering in his thousand year reign on earth, with a covenant keeping, home from the dispersal nation of faithful, Christ believing Jews. That's what happens here. This is redemption, not destruction! These verses are separated from 24 and previous by the end that they point to.
Then the fig tree, and these two verses:
31 So also, when you see these things taking place, you know that the kingdom of God is near. 32 Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all has taken place. [Luk 21:31-32 ESV]
These are both referencing Christ's return. So we have to explain what "this generation" is about, because it seems to say that those to whom Jesus is speaking will be there for the second coming. I had to get my MSB out for this one. MSB sends me to a note on Matthew 24:34 for an explanation. That note suggests that the generation Jesus is referring to is the generation that sees the summarized events (the signs) of vvs 25-28 in Luke. Those alive to see the signs in sun, moon and stars, that future generation, will see those signs, AND the Kingdom of God AND the return of the Son of Man.
2021 - vss 31-38 The events portrayed in vss 25-33 will come upon all the earth. This is part of watching for the second coming of Christ. The sign of the fig tree will come at the end. Don't be so drunk that you don't see it. Surely this message is to the Jews who will have returned to Christ, recognized him as Messiah, and be worshiping Him during those final 7 years.
Still 2020 - I am so glad I took the extended time to work through these verses. I am very comfortable with the way they go together, and that there is no need at all to either jump around in chronology or get allegorical about what anything means. This is a straightforward, literal interpretation, and it is chronological from beginning to end. This is how it is supposed to be. I will use this interpretation now, when I get to Matthew 24 day after tomorrow and see if that chapter can be looked at in linear, chronological organization also, just as this one can. What a good morning!