Matthew 23:34-36 is the lynch pin for the entire context behind the Olivet Discourse. We need to understand what exactly Jesus was saying to the religious leaders and to the people to understand what will follow in Chapter 24.
UPON THE RELIGIOUS LEADERS WOULD THE GUILT FALL (Matthew 23:34-36)
Following the 7th woe, the Lord moves from their past association with the death of the prophets to their present/future participation. Jesus states that He is sending them prophets and wise men whom they will kill and crucify and scourge. The term “sending” is in the present tense while the killing, crucifying, scourging, and persecuting are all actions in the future tense. Prophets, wise men, and scribes would be sent “to you”, those specific religious leaders. The language of the persecution of the messengers resembles the Lord’s words to the disciples in 10:17-23 and what would happen to them. This may have included Stephen (Acts 7:58-59) and James (Acts 12:1-2). The guilt of the blood spilt in the death of the prophets whether past, present or in the not-too-distant future would fall upon “you”[1]. The responsibility for these murders and those to come will fall upon those who live in “this generation”.
The blood of Abel (Genesis 4:8) and Zechariah[2] were both murders that required retribution. The justice for the deaths of God’s messengers would fall upon those standing in the temple with Christ that day and the city of Jerusalem (23:37). The term “this generation” is consistently used throughout the gospel of Matthew of those who were living in the first century. His coming in judgment would be witnessed by those standing with Him (Matthew 16:28) and even states to the members of the Sanhedrin during His trial that they would witness His coming (Matthew 26:46). Their reprisal will be confirmed in the following verses with the destruction of Jerusalem by the roman armies in A.D. 70.
THE LAMENTATION FOR JERUSALEM & THE DESOLATE HOUSE (Matthew 23:37-39)
In His previous condemnatory words, The Lord focused primarily upon the religious leaders but now moves to expand His audience to the broader term “this generation”. He moves His focus by addressing Jerusalem including the temple. He identifies the city in like manner to the religious leaders; as those who kill and stone the prophets. Jesus came as their Messiah and while He appealed to the crowds to accept Him like a hen gathers her chicks[3], the intervention of the religious leaders would result in the rejection of the Messiah and judgment upon their city and temple.
In V. 38, the Lord Jesus explicitly states the judgment would fall upon your house. Note the switch from the earlier expression My house (Matthew 21:13). As Kenneth Gentry points out: Furthermore, this seems intentionally intended to reflect God’s statement to Jeremiah: ““I have forsaken My house, I have abandoned My inheritance; I have given the beloved of My soul Into the hand of her enemies”. (Jeremiah 12:7)[4]. This is unquestionably a reference to the temple but certainly could extend to the people as well as the city. N.T. France observes that:
In that case there is a sad irony in that what was described in 21:13 as God’s house is not “your house”, and it has been left “to you” because God has abandoned it, as Jesus himself is about to do in 24:1[5].
This house would be left to them desolate through the judgment to come just a few years later. When the Lord Jesus entered the city, those following Him were laying their coats and branches before Him and shouting, “Hosanna to the Son of David: Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord”. These very same people would choose Barabbas over Him and call for His crucifixion.
The expression I say to you, from now on you will not see Me until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!’” is challenging. Some have argued that this statement predicts a restoration of the city and its people and how they will eventually be restored the day that they see Him at His 2nd coming. The phrase however is not of a predictive nature but seems to point to an indefinite condition. Once again, N.T. France notes:
There is no prediction here, only a condition. Or, rather, the only prediction is an emphatic negative, “from now on you will certainly not see me,” to which the following “until” clause provides the only possible exception. They will not see him again until they welcome him, but the indefinite phrasing of the second clause gives no assurance that such a welcome will ever be forthcoming[6].
We should remember that these are Jesus’ last words offered to the religious leaders and to the crowd. The next time Jesus is in Jerusalem will be for His trial and scourging prior to being lead to His death at Golgotha.
In our next segment, we will now enter the actual content of the Olivet Discourse keeping in mind all that we have examined regarding the condemning words of the Lord Jesus upon them.
[1] The idea of judgment coming upon (taking responsibility) is similar to 2 Samuel 1:16; Jonah 1:14
[2] The challenge with Zechariah is that he is called the son of Berechiah while the individual better suited in this reference would be Zechariah in 2 Chronicles 24 who was murdered and the son of Jehoiada. He was the last martyr referred to in the Masoretic texts. Commentators are not in agreement as to the identity of Zechariah. The son of Berechiah was Zechariah the prophet (Zechariah 1:1) yet we are not told how he died but he could be identified as the last of the prophets who was killed.
[3] France points to the OT imagery such as Psalm 17:8; 91:4; Isaiah 31:5
[4] The Olivet Discourse Made Easy, Kenneth L. Gentry, Victorious Hope Publishing, 2010, Page 35
[5] France P. 884
[6] France P. 885
The Moncton Herald 