An intertextual analysis of Matthew 24 and Luke 21

An intertextual analysis of Matthew 24 and Luke 21, often referred to as the Olivet Discourse, reveals significant parallels in their prophetic content, yet also distinct differences in emphasis, framing, and specific details. Both chapters recount Jesus' teachings about future tumultuous events, including the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, periods of suffering, and the ultimate coming of the Son of Man. However, they appear to be shaped by the distinct theological aims and intended audiences of each Gospel writer.

Here is an intertextual analysis in bullet form:

I. Common Themes and Structure:

• Prediction of Temple Destruction: Both Matthew 24:1-2 and Luke 21:5-6 begin with Jesus predicting the complete destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, where not one stone will be left on another. This prophecy serves as the catalyst for the disciples' questions.
• Disciples' Questions:
  • In Matthew 24:3, the disciples ask, "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?"¹ This frames the discourse around both the immediate future of the Temple and broader eschatological events.
  • In Luke 21:7, the disciples ask, "Teacher, when will these things be? And what will be the sign when these things are about to take place?" Luke's question is more focused on "these things" (referring to the Temple's destruction and associated events).
• General Signs of the Times: Both accounts list similar preliminary signs:
  • Deception by false messiahs (Matthew 24:4-5; Luke 21:8).
  • Wars and rumors/disturbances (Matthew 24:6-7; Luke 21:9-10).
  • Nation rising against nation, famines, and earthquakes (Matthew 24:7; Luke 21:10-11). Luke adds "pestilences" and "fearful events and great signs from heaven" (Luke 21:11).
• Persecution of Disciples: Both Gospels describe a period of persecution for the followers of Jesus:
  • They will be delivered up, hated, and some put to death (Matthew 24:9; Luke 21:12, 16).
  • This will be an opportunity for testimony (Matthew 24:14 [gospel preached to all nations]; Luke 21:13).
  • Betrayal by family and friends (Matthew 24:10 [implies this]; Luke 21:16).
  • Promise of divine assistance in their defense (Luke 21:14-15, a detail not as explicit in Matthew during this section).
  • Call for endurance (Matthew 24:13; Luke 21:19).
• The Desolation of Jerusalem:
  • Matthew 24:15 refers to the "abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place." This is often interpreted by scholars as referencing events surrounding the Roman siege.
  • Luke 21:20 is more direct and historical in its description: "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near." This is widely understood to refer to the Roman siege of AD 70.
• Instructions to Flee: Both accounts urge those in Judea to flee to the mountains when these signs appear (Matthew 24:16-18; Luke 21:21-23).
• Great Distress: Both speak of a time of unparalleled suffering.
  • Matthew 24:21 describes a "great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, no, and never will be."
  • Luke 21:23b-24 describes "great distress upon the land and wrath against this people. 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."² Luke's phrasing points more explicitly to the historical outcome of AD 70 and a subsequent period.
• Cosmic Signs and the Coming of the Son of Man: Both Gospels describe dramatic celestial events preceding or accompanying the Son of Man's arrival:
  • Sun darkened, moon not giving light, stars falling (Matthew 24:29; Luke 21:25-26 [includes "distress of nations in perplexity because of the roaring of the sea and the waves, people fainting with fear"]).
  • The appearance of the Son of Man in power and glory (Matthew 24:30; Luke 21:27).
• Parable of the Fig Tree: Both use the budding of the fig tree as an analogy for recognizing the nearness of these events (Matthew 24:32-33; Luke 21:29-31).
• The Imminence of "These Things" and "This Generation": Both state that "this generation will not pass away until all these things take place" (Matthew 24:34; Luke 21:32), a statement subject to much interpretive debate (whether it refers to the disciples' contemporaries, the generation seeing the signs, or has a symbolic meaning).
• Call to Watchfulness and Readiness: Both conclude with exhortations to be alert and prepared, as the exact timing is unknown (Matthew 24:36-44; Luke 21:34-36). Matthew notably includes the detail that "concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only" (Matthew 24:36).³

II. Key Differences and Unique Emphases:

• Audience and Purpose:
  • Matthew: Often seen as writing for a predominantly Jewish-Christian audience, Matthew's account emphasizes the "sign of your coming and of the end of the age," potentially linking the destruction of the Temple more explicitly with final eschatological events. The reference to the "abomination of desolation" from Daniel would resonate strongly with a Jewish readership. There's a focus on the "great tribulation" and the preaching of the gospel to "all nations" as a prerequisite to the end.
  • Luke: Writing for a broader Gentile audience (traditionally associated with Theophilus), Luke provides a more historical-sounding prophecy regarding Jerusalem's destruction ("surrounded by armies"). He uniquely includes the phrase "until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled" (Luke 21:24), suggesting a period of Gentile dominion following Jerusalem's fall. Luke's version often appears to separate the events of AD 70 more clearly from the final cosmic coming of the Son of Man, though both are present.
• Specific Phrasing of Signs:
  • As noted, Matthew uses "abomination of desolation," while Luke uses "Jerusalem surrounded by armies." While potentially referring to the same core event (the Roman sacrilege and destruction), Luke's is less apocalyptic and more descriptive of a military siege.
  • Luke 21:11 explicitly mentions "pestilences" and "fearful events and great signs from heaven" as initial signs, which are not as distinctly itemized in Matthew's parallel list.
• Details of Persecution and Divine Aid:
  • Luke 21:14-15 offers a specific promise: "Settle it therefore in your minds not to meditate beforehand how to answer, for I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which none of your adversaries will be able to withstand or contradict." This is a stronger, more direct assurance in the face of interrogation than in Matthew's parallel.
• The "Great Tribulation" vs. "Great Distress":
  • Matthew's "great tribulation" (Matthew 24:21) is described in terms of its unprecedented nature in all of history.
  • Luke's "great distress upon the land and wrath against this people" (Luke 21:23) followed by being "led captive among all nations" and Jerusalem being "trampled underfoot by the Gentiles" (Luke 21:24) has a more specific focus on the judgment upon Judea and the subsequent diaspora and Gentile power.
• Scope of "The End":
  • Matthew's structure, prompted by the disciples' explicit question about "the end of the age," arguably intertwines the fall of Jerusalem and the final parousia (coming/presence) of Christ more tightly.
  • Luke's structure can be read as presenting a more distinct sequence: the fall of Jerusalem, followed by a period ("the times of the Gentiles"), and then the signs leading to the Son of Man's ultimate return.
• Placement of Certain Sayings: Some teachings found within these discourses in one Gospel might appear in different contexts in another. For example, some of the warnings about watchfulness in Matthew 24 have parallels in Luke 12 and 17 as well as Luke 21.
• Omissions:
  • Matthew includes the detail that many false prophets will arise and lead many astray, and lawlessness will be increased, leading to the love of many growing cold (Matthew 24:11-12), which is not as prominent in Luke's account of the initial signs.
  • The explicit statement about the Son not knowing the day or hour (Matthew 24:36) is present in Mark 13:32 but not explicitly in Luke 21, though the call for readiness due to unknowable timing is clear.

III. Theological Implications:

• Dual Fulfillment/Prophetic Telescoping: Many scholars see in these discourses an example of prophetic telescoping, where events near in time (like the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem) serve as types or foreshadowings of events further in the future (the final coming of Christ and the end of the age). Matthew might blend these more, while Luke might offer more clues to differentiate, at least temporally, the fall of Jerusalem from the final parousia.
• Sovereignty of God and Human Responsibility: Both accounts affirm God's foreknowledge and sovereignty over history, yet simultaneously call for human response: endurance, watchfulness, and faithfulness.
• Comfort and Warning: The discourses serve both to warn of coming difficulties and to comfort believers with the assurance of Christ's ultimate triumph and return.

In summary, while Matthew 24 and Luke 21 draw from a common tradition of Jesus' prophetic sayings, their individual presentations are tailored. Matthew highlights the eschatological significance for a Jewish-oriented audience, perhaps seeing the Temple's fall as a more direct prelude to the end. Luke, addressing a wider audience, provides a clearer historical marker for Jerusalem's destruction and distinctly introduces the "times of the Gentiles," offering a framework that accommodates a longer period before the final consummation. Both, however, underscore the certainty of future judgment and deliverance through the coming of the Son of Man.