Jesus warned about deception but did we listen?
There is a great deal of deception and false teaching surrounding Jesus’ words in Matthew 24 & 25.
Jesus and a few of his close disciples sat on the Mount of Olives. They discussed future events and the end of the age. Jesus’ primary focus was far into the future, but he also mentioned some things that took place in the more immediate future. His words were intended to prepare the disciples he spoke to at the time. He also knew that his words would instruct other disciples for the next two thousand years.
Many Bible prophecy teachers, seminaries, and Church organizations miss this two-thousand-year reality. Some teachers strongly support the notion that the Lord’s words, all the way through verse 29 were only referencing the immediate future.
That’s crazy talk!
In one of my other lives, ( I have several.) I teach children.
They love it when I use the phrase, “That’s crazy talk.” I make that statement to the children as I’m explaining a misunderstanding in the scriptures. I find it very important to point out to the children that adults are easily misled. Jesus corrected them and we as teachers should point this out to young learners. If we don’t point out mistakes in interpretations, then the errors keep perpetuating into future generations. Many don’t trust the scriptures for this very reason. If there are so many opinions, how can we trust anyone? This is how problems persist.
More and more crazy talk.
The scribes and Pharisees were often confused when they heard Jesus speak. But the Church has picked up its habit of misreading the Lord’s words. We have created a brave new world of crazy interpretations. The stubborn doctrinarian will always refuse to turn away from his or her errant position. Just like the goats in the picture, they will beat their idea into the heads of others rather than consider that they could be wrong.
The “crazy talk” of the Pharisees needed correction many times. Other times it was the disciples. Peter was a regular offender in this regard. Peter finally learned to listen and adjust his understanding. We should learn to do the same.
It’s common though for people to be confused and obstinate after reading the Lord’s words. I will address some of that confusion surrounding this one verse.
Matthew 24:4
“And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.”
This is a very short verse but packed with a lot of problems. The deception has grown deeper and deeper ever since Jesus uttered those words.
I will start with a few verses on the topic of deception. Then I will present four different points of view on Jesus’ opening statement about deception.
Titus 1:10
For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group.
Psalms 12:2
Everyone lies to their neighbor; they flatter with their lips but harbor deception in their hearts.
Proverbs 14:8
The wisdom of the prudent is to give thought to their ways, but the folly of fools is deception.
Now let’s look at some of the “experts.”
I highlighted the word ‘experts’ because the Pharisees were experts in the law and they got just about everything mixed up and wrong. So we need to be careful about who has expert status. The fishermen who followed Jesus gained more notoriety because they had been with Jesus rather than to the finest schools.
Acts 4:13
When they saw the courage of Peter and John and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished and they took note that these men had been with Jesus.
The next four “experts” gave their opinions as to the meaning of the verse, Matthew 24:4. And to be clear, I have great respect for most biblical scholars, even if I don’t agree with their conclusions. What I want to say to every reader is this. Trust the Bible, but question every so-called expert or teacher.
Now let’s see how they interpreted it.
Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers
(4) Jesus answered and said unto them… .–The great discourse which follows is given with substantial agreement by St. Mark and St. Luke, the variations being such as were naturally incident to reports made from memory, and probably after an interval of many years. In all probability, the written record came, in the first instance, from the lips of St. Peter, and it will accordingly be instructive to compare its eschatology, or “teaching as to the last things,” with that which we find in his discourses and epistles.
St. Paul’s reference
to “the day of the Lord “coming” as a thief in the night” (1Thessalonians 5:2) suggests the inference that its substance had become known at a comparatively early date; but it was probably not published, i.e., not thrown as a document into circulation, among Christian Jews, till the time was near when its warnings would be needed; and this may, in part, account for the variations with which it then appeared.
My thoughts:
He correctly advises the reader to look at Mark and Luke to get a proper perspective of the text. He notes there are expected variations from each author. Matthew, Mark, and Luke presented from their own point of view.
Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
And Jesus answered and said unto them,… Not to indulge their curiosity, but to instruct them in things useful to be known, and which might be warnings to them and others, against deceivers; confirm them in the faith of himself, when they should see his predictions accomplished; and be directions to them, of what might shortly be expected.
Take heed that no man deceive you:by pretending to come from God with a new revelation, setting himself up for the Messiah, after my departure; suggesting himself to be the person designed by God to be the deliverer of Israel, and to be sent by him, to set up a temporal kingdom, in great worldly splendour and glory; promising great names, and high places of honour and trust in it; things which Christ knew his disciples were fond of and were in danger of being ensnared by; and therefore gives them this suitable and seasonable advice, and caution.
My thoughts:
Gill’s comments indicate he believed Jesus’ words were primarily directed toward the immediate future. That would mean most of the attention was on the near-to-come destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. To be fair, this is a small sample size of the commentary so we mustn’t judge without looking deeper.
He said the words were meant to instruct and give useful warnings for things to come in the future. That appears to imply Jesus was only focused on the near-to-come future events.
Matthew Henry Commentary
24:4-28 The disciples had asked concerning the times When these things should be? Christ gave them no answer to that; but they had also asked, What shall be the sign? This question he answers fully.
The prophecy first respects events near at hand, the destruction of Jerusalem, the end of the Jewish church and state, the calling of the Gentiles, and the setting up of Christ’s kingdom in the world; but it also looks to the general judgment; and toward the close, points more particularly to the latter.
What Christ here said to his disciples,
tended more to promote caution than to satisfy their curiosity; more to prepare them for the events that should happen, than to give a distinct idea of the events. This is that good understanding of the times which all should covet, thence to infer what Israel ought to do. Our Saviour cautions his disciples to stand on their guard against false teachers.
And he foretells wars and great commotions among nations.
From the time that the Jews rejected Christ, and he left their house desolate, the sword never departed from them. See what comes of refusing the gospel. Those who will not hear the messengers of peace shall be made to hear the messengers of war. But where the heart is fixed, trusting in God, it is kept in peace and is not afraid. It is against the mind of Christ, that his people should have troubled hearts, even in troublous times. When we looked forward to the eternity of misery that is before the obstinate refusers of Christ and his gospel, we may truly say, The greatest earthly judgments are but the beginning of sorrows.
My thoughts:
Matthew’s Commentary has the most troubling interpretation of the three thus far. His firm view of the Jewish people is clear. This is the view that many have taken in the last two thousand years. I chose to highlight some of the more egregious errors in this commentary.
He’s primarily focused on short-term fulfillment. He refers to the end of the Jewish church and state. That’s the core of his error and that of many others. God is not finished with Israel. Their state isn’t finished. God will finish the work he began in them. Some Christians love to boast that they are an unfinished work but the Jews are finished. There is no mercy for them it is suggested. That’s wrong.
Setting up Christ’s Kingdom:
This is a focal point of this position. Christ’s Kingdom is now set up. We only await the Church fully maturing and bringing in everlasting peace. Things are getting better every day now that Christ’s Kingdom is set up. Wrong! At the end of the Book of Revelation, we see Christ’s Kingdom set up on earth as it is in heaven. It’s not set up on earth yet.
Refusing the Gospel and accepting the deception:
This errant view puts strong condemnation on the Jews for rejecting Christ’s message. This is just the beginning of their sorrows Matthew Henry declares. The dispersion and the Holocaust are just the beginning of what they will endure in eternal hell. Such gracious words come from educated Christians. There will be more than an egg on their faces when they see a revived and repentant Israel praising Jesus as their Savior.
Let’s look at another commentator.
Pulpit Commentary
Verses 4-41. – The first portion of the great prophecy. Verse 4. – Jesus answered and said. The succeeding prophecy has much exercised the minds of commentators from the earliest times into the present. It is, indeed, full of mysteries, dark sayings, profundities, which our minds cannot fathom. Many of these are and must be inherent in the subject; but some difficulties have been created by the imperfect views taken by those who have applied themselves to explain the Lord’s utterances.
It is seen by all
that we have here predictions concerning the fate of Jerusalem, concerning the parousia of Christ, and concerning the last times; it is the attempt to assign to these events separately certain definite portions of the address that has led to confusion and perplexity. Over-refinement and over-wisdom have marred the exposition of many critics. They have limited to one event that which was spoken of more than that one; confining their view to one point, they have excluded other points which were equally in the mind of the Revealer.
It has been usual to divide the prophecy
in this chapter into two sections, of which the first, extending to the twenty-ninth verse, is supposed to relate to the fate of Jerusalem itself; the second, comprising the rest of the chapter, to the parousia and the coming to judgment. But such definite partition will not stand investigation, and can be maintained only by doing violence to language or ignoring more natural explanations.
The prophecy announces analogous events,
the description of which has more than one application, and often passes from one to another with nothing to closely mark the transition. The combination of facts thus woven together cannot be coarsely unravelled. The same words, the same expressions, are used to denote the arrival or fulfilment of distinct occurrences. To limit these to one event only is to set bounds to the Omniscient.
So it seems to be
not only most expedient, but most reverent, to look on our Lord’s eschatological address as one whole, of which the several parts are in full harmony and sequence (if we were only able to understand them), and to acknowledge that insuperable difficulties in the interpretation do exist and are meant to exist.
The Lord had to prepare
his followers for the overthrow of their city, and the dangers to life and faith which would accompany that judgment. He desired also to raise in them a constant expectation of his advent, so that Christians then and thenceforward might ever live in hope and watch for a great future. Herein will be found the key to the perplexities of the address; not that even this unlocks all the mysteries, but, it opens the drift of these wonderful utterances, and enables us to see light amid the gloom. This will appear more fully as we examine the details.
Take heed that no man deceive you;
πλανήσῃ: lead you astray (so ver. 5). Jesus does not answer the disciples’ question as to the time when “these things” shall occur; that is purposely left uncertain. He proceeds to warn them against the dangers which would beset them in the coming crisis. He withdraws them from the speculative to the practical (see vers. 23-25).
My thoughts:
I find very little to disagree with in this commentary. He brings out issues that are sorely overlooked in Matthew’s Commentary. The topics of Jesus’ words were not restricted to the immediate future. I have highlighted several points and phrases which are important for a better understanding of the Olivet discourse.
Three main events were the focus of the sermon. Those three things were the fate of Jerusalem, the return of Christ, and the end of the age. Pulpit’s Commentary delves into some of the problems when “overly-wise critics” just focus on the first one. He writes that the Revealer, Jesus, had more than one thing in mind.
Violence to the language.
They do “violence to the language” and context when they force all the words toward one position. There is a lot to unravel in this passage. I like where he says those critics set bounds to the Omniscient when they limit the scope of the passage to only the destruction of Jerusalem.
So, in conclusion, I haven’t solved any problems that can lead to deception. But maybe I stirred you to think outside of the box of experts. “Crazy talk” is what some critics end up spewing. Jesus’ words were focused on more than the A.D. 70 prophecy.
As I move slowly through the text we will see that more clearly.
Let me know what you think.