Sermon to the Saints which are at Topeka, Kansas -- Sunday, December 20, 2020

I’ve been considering the words of Christ regarding His second advent. Three of the four synoptic
gospels … Matthew, Mark, and Luke … made a record of what he said in response to the question
he was asked: “what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” (Matthew 24:3).
I’ve received a decent number of questions of recent about what these Apostles wrote on these
matters. I’ve had starts and stops in examining the words of Christ in this sermon of His, but have
felt too limited in understanding the gospels generally that I continually hit roadblocks that stymied
my progress. My spirit is compelled to it, so I’m hopeful that “the faithful witness” (Revelation 1:5)
will by my advocate with the Father to strengthen me in seeking this out.

It will take some unpacking to set framing to Christ’s words, so we will take these examinations
methodically. I want to begin by getting the context of the engagement as clear as Scripture makes
it. The words of the three authors articulate two different events immediately preceding Christ’s
discussion regarding eschatology. I believe it is important to help us in understanding why the
discussion was held when and where we find it. Those who sew confusion about this blessed Word
make much of apparent incongruencies in the text. Therefore, lest any conclude that this fact makes
the reports in any way invalid, we should look at those events to get ourselves set.

***************

“Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth,
till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.” (Matthew 23:38-39)

The Lord Jesus Christ informed the Jews who lived in the time of His first advent that because of
their endless rejection of His plain and blessedly simple admonitions, He was rejecting them. He
was declaring their religion false, bloody, murderous, and utterly without relationship to God … it
was “desolate”. Then, He told them that until His return … when He would call out a remnant of
that nation … He would not be seen in their comforting company. We know He was technically
“seen” of them more, because they otherwise could not have “taken, and by wicked hands []
crucified and slain [Him]” (Acts 2:23). So He clearly meant that they would not have His comforting
spirit and His light and His grace to guide, teach, and stay them, as their actual Messiah … their
Passover Lamb.

In the account of Matthew, this is the last thing recorded before “Jesus went out, and departed
from the temple [and made His way to where] he sat upon the mount of Olives”. (Matthew 24:1,
3). In his analysis of this language that opens Matthew 24, Dr. Gill says: “He not only went out of it
for that time, but took his final leave of it, never to return more to it”. As much as if to say, “I’m done
with YOU, I’m done with this abominable RELIGION, and I’m done with this pretentious TEMPLE”, as
was prophesied: “[W]oe also to them when I depart from them!” (Hosea 9:12) Now I like this. I
like it particularly because those words from Christ have symmetry. They line up with Him then

Page 1 of 11
discussing the larger picture of eschatology. He will not be seen again until the Day of the Lord,
because that is when the Jews will finally say “blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord”,
after the 144,000 of them are sealed. So, Christ making this declaration lines up with His sermon on
Mt. Olivet shortly thereafter. That’s why I like Matthew’s sequencing on the subject.

The last event that Mark records prior to the engagement by Christ on the questions of eschatology,
regards the widow who “threw in two mites, which make a farthing” (Mark 12:42) into the temple
treasury, causing Christ to comment to His disciples “this poor widow hath cast more in, than all
they which have cast into the treasure [because she] did cast in all that she had, even all her
living.” (Mark 12:43-44). While this is a spectacular instruction to us all regarding how we should
invest ourselves into service to God, presenting our “bodies a living sacrifice” (Romans 12:1), it
doesn’t segue as smoothly into discussions of eschatology.

Matthew does not specifically discuss Christ’s comments about the widow’s mites, but he covers
much more of Christ’s engagement with the Scribes and Pharisees than we find in Mark’s account.
Luke’s account helps to see the relationship between the sequencing in Matthew’s account and that
of Mark. We find that he also records Christ’s words about the widow casting in the two mites, and
gives a context to His words. Christ making note of the widow follows hard after He scolded the
Scribes and Pharisees, to wit:

“Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets,
and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts; Which devour widows’
houses, and for a shew make long prayers: the same shall receive greater damnation.” (Luke
20:46-47)

Matthew also recorded this part of Christ’s words to the Scribes and Pharisees in chapter 23:13-14,
and then continues to document how Christ further chastised them with seven distinct additional
woes, concluding that he was leaving them and their human-worshipping religion. It was clearly in
the midst of these chastisements that Christ “looked up, and saw the rich men casting their gifts
into the treasury [and] a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites” (Luke 21:1-2) and made
His comment to His disciples, as recorded by Mark and Luke. So, while the three accounts are not
identical in how much detail they report, they are clearly in sync and clearly legitimate.
Furthermore, it is evident that the final and closing remarks by Christ were about His leaving the
Jews, as Matthew reports. So our context is intact. Let us move to the next engagement.

****************

The next part of the dialog leading to Christ’s sermon is consistently reported by all three of these
Apostles, to wit:

Page 2 of 11
 “And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew
him the buildings of the temple.” (Matthew 24:1)

&

“And as he went out of the temple, one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner
of stones and what buildings are here!” (Mark 13:1)

&

“And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said”.
(Luke 21:5)

The work to do with this passage is first to understand the energy with which these utterances came,
and then to work at being clear why such an energy was present. As we see in Matthew’s and Mark’s
accounts demonstrate, this question came to Christ “as he sat upon the mount of Olives” (Matthew
24:3; Mark 13:3). This is instructive, as Dr. Gill helpfully articulates:

“[And as he sat upon the Mount of Olives,] Which was on the east of the city of Jerusalem, "over
against the temple," as Mark says [v.3], and where he could sit and take a full view of it; for the
wall on the east side was lower than any other, and that for this reason; that when the high priest
burnt the red heifer on this mount, as he did, and sprinkled the blood, he might have a view of the
gate of the temple. It is said {b },

“all the walls which were there, were very high, except the eastern wall; for the high priest,
when he burned the heifer, stood on the top of the mount of Olives, and directed himself, and
looked to the gate of the temple, at the time he sprinkled the blood.”

This place, very probably, our Lord chose to sit in, that he might give his disciples an occasion to
discourse more largely with him on this subject”.

The discussion, Christ very well knew, was going to be about the temple. As Luke’s account
intimates, this included “how it was adorned with goodly stones” and therefore Christ intended it
to be in fullest view to them all. If He is to address the passions that are in their human frames, part
of that includes no subterfuge. It is notable that in Mark’s account, the imperative question ends
with an exclamation point! There is energy in the question “see what manner of stones and what
buildings are here!” What manner indeed?

Gill: “The Jews give very great encomiums of the second temple, as repaired by Herod; and it was
undoubtedly a very fine structure. They say {p }, that he built the house of the sanctuary, ‘an

Page 3 of 11
exceeding beautiful building’; and that he repaired the temple, in beauty ‘greatly exceeding’ that of
Solomon’s {q }. They moreover observe {r }, that

‘he who has not seen the building of Herod, has never seen ‘a beautiful building.’ With what
is it built? says Rabbah, with stones of green and white marble. And there are others say, that
it was built with stones of spotted green and white marble.’”

With the language used and the historical lens given, we can clearly discern that the Apostles were
themselves quite animated about it. But why? Had not Christ already seen the temple in detail, as
he specifically charged those who came to seize him: “I sat daily with you teaching in the temple,
and ye laid no hold on me.” (Matthew 26:55) We clearly cannot attribute a pedestrian motivation
to the disciples in pointing it out to Him. There’s a purpose in this work, and I believe it is intimately
tied into the ensuing discussion about eschatology.

Expositors suggest one motive for underscoring the magnificence of the temple is to seek Christ to
temper His declaration that the “house is left unto you desolate”, as though His words in that
statement were aimed at the physical city and temple. But we know that is not His intent with that
declaration, but that the Jewish religion – directed to be centered in that city and temple – was
desolate and would be left in that miserable state until they are spiritually revived. It cheapens the
magnitude of the declaration, and makes light of the sobriety with which His disciples attended to
His Word and work. Are we to believe that they would hear Christ say He’s abandoning the Jews
and then plead with Him on the basis of the beauty of a building?

“Heaven is my throne, and earth is my footstool: what house will ye build me? saith the Lord:”
(Acts 7:49)

And it cannot be in the way of pleading for Christ to reconsider the complete destruction of the
temple … because He tells them of this destructive prophecy in response to their showing Him the
buildings, as if explanation of why they are out of focus with their attention on that temple. I don’t
believe we’ve sounded the depths of what we have going on here with this passionate engagement
by the disciples of Christ. Consider this analysis of Dr. Gill on the later verse regarding “what shall
be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” (v.3):

“Which two are put together, as what they supposed would be at the same time, and immediately follow the
destruction of the temple. That he was come in the flesh, and was the true Messiah, they firmly believed: he
was with them, and they expected he would continue with them, for they had no notion of his leaving them,
and coming again. When he at any time spake of his dying and rising from the dead, they seemed not to
understand it: wherefore this coming of his, the sign of which, they inquire, is not to be understood of his
coming a second time to judge the world, at the last day; but of his coming in his kingdom and glory, which
they had observed him some little time before to speak of; declaring that some present should not die, till
they saw it: wherefore they wanted to be informed, by what sign they might know, when he would set up his

Page 4 of 11
temporal kingdom; for since the temple was to be destroyed, they might hope a new one would be built, much
more magnificent than this, and which is a Jewish notion; and that a new state of things would commence;
the present world, or age, would be at a period; and the world to come, they had so often heard of from the
Jewish doctors, would take place; and therefore they ask also, of the sign of the end of the world, or present
state of things in the Jewish economy: to this Christ answers, in the latter part of this chapter, though not to
the sense in which they put the questions; yet in the true sense of the coming of the Son of Man, and the end
of the world;”

This is getting to what I believe was driving the whole of the discussion with the disciples, and
specifically what motivated them so passionately to point out the glories of the temple across the
valley. If Christ’s kingdom is at hand, in the sense of it being literally unfolding in front of their eyes,
then it stands to reason that the seat of that kingdom is across the valley in that beautiful temple!
What a magnificent center for Christ’s earthly throne! He just roundly chastised the Jews who were
promulgating a false religious system – filled to the full with arrogant, hypocritical leaders “teaching
for doctrines the commandments of men.” (Mark 7:7) What better time to take His seat in that
beautiful structure and set all things in order?

This is helpful in two ways. First, it makes the ensuing dialog between Christ and His Apostles much
clearer and altogether consistent with the myriad prophecies that preceded it and followed it.
Second, it humbles us. We need to be sober about this question, seeking as intently to adhere only
to what Scripture teaches as we are zealous in our searching out and preaching His blessed Word.
God dwells in eternity … we are (pitifully) limited to that portion of the created timeline appointed
to us in this life. God opens His Word and closes His Word on His direction. Men cannot pry into
things not appointed to our understanding. The patriarch Job said “I uttered that I understood not;
things too wonderful for me, which I knew not.” (Job 42:3) We should loath to find ourselves
dealing lightly with these deep matters of eschatology; but rather to wait for God to show us when
He has appointed us to know.

***************
The next portion of this engagement that needs some treatment respects Christ’s response to the
frenetic energy coming from His disciples about the glories of the temple. Here is what the three
authors wrote:

“And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be
left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” (Matthew 24:2)

&

“And Jesus answering said unto him, Seest thou these great buildings? there shall not be left one
stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” (Mark 13:2)

Page 5 of 11
 &

“As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one
stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” (Luke 21:6)

Much has been written and said about the destruction of Herod’s temple in 70 AD. The expositors
all address the obvious parallel with the historic account to these sober words, and John Trapp adds
some interesting tidbits in anchoring this point of our analysis with some flare:

“This was afterwards fulfilled, when the temple was so set on fire by Titus’ soldiers, that it could not
be quenched by the industry of man. Titus (it is said) would have preserved the temple, as one of the
world’s wonders, from being burnt, but could not; such was the fury of the soldiers, set to work by
God doubtless. And when, upon the taking of the city and temple, the army saluted him emperor,
and many others by way of congratulation sent him crowns and garlands, he, by a memorable
example of modesty, refused them, saying, that he had done nothing more than lent his hands and
help to God, who declared his fierce wrath against that sinful people.”

I think this is satisfactory to establish a well-known point about these passages. We should also
keep in mind that Christ wasn’t simply declaring a prophecy for the sake of the prophecy. He was
answering an implied question from His disciples. The historical outcome – as amazing and
renowned an event it was – is almost more an underscoring of His answer than anything else. They
believed He was going to use that structure to set up His kingdom in the earth. That was not the
case, and could never be considered to be the case. So far from that ever being appropriately in the
mind of humanity, the whole of it would be deconstructed so severely that it could no longer be
known exactly where it stood! Dr. Gill says that after burning the temple as much as fire could
consume it, they used plows to dig up the stones and laid the earth flat again so as never to illicit
speculation about where it had previously stood. In a sermon dated April 9, 2017 I discussed some
additional historic information about the confusion on the location of that temple.

Furthermore, it was this amazing judgment of God upon that people that still resides rent free in
their collective mind! It is their arrogant, human logic that compels the conclusion that they are
required by God to construct themselves another temple. God never directed them to do so! The
complete oblivion of that former structure – that was to underscore God’s emphatic rejection of
that people – has no scripture-based neogenesis. The only new temple authorized in God’s
establishment of Christ in earthly and heavenly splendor is that which opens up in heaven
(Revelation 15:5) and descends to the earth (Revelation 21:10). No man-made temple will be part
of Christ’s earthly reign, and nobody anticipating that event should ever make the mistake of
attributing a human-made structure to that glorious event.

***************

Page 6 of 11
Having brought us to the point in this exchange on Mt. Olivet, between Christ and His disciples,
where the negative is established – that Christ’s earthly reign was not at hand and would certainly
not be in that structure across the valley – the time comes to draw a sharper point about the
question.

“And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us,
when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the
world?” (Matthew 24:3)

&

“And as he sat upon the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and
Andrew asked him privately, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign
when all these things shall be fulfilled?” (Mark 13:3-4)

&

“And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign will there
be when these things shall come to pass?” (Luke 21:7)

I’ve read the expositors’ words on these three passages … even Joseph Seiss, to the extent that he
gathers snippets of Christ’s words into his analyses, as he relates the writings of the Revelation to
them. There is an assumption in their writings that there are three distinct questions being raised,
variably, in these passages:

1. When will be the destruction of the temple?

I submit to you that is an incorrect analysis. It is grounded in the notion that while the Apostles may
have originally been focusing on when Christ’s earthly reign was to occur – once Christ told them
the temple was going to be destroyed, they suddenly became infatuated with learning when that
event was scheduled. We are expected to believe that an eternity-focused discussion is reduced to
a fascination with the details of when Christ will dispose of a temporal structure? Again, we’ve
slipped into a disregard for the fire that burns in the bellies of those dear saints – like that burning
in our own bones. For example, other than a temporary contextual preaching point, what care do
the souls in this church have for how and when the twin towers were disposed of?

An important point here is that the dialog moving forward from this point is no longer with the larger
group of persons, identified as “disciples” or followers. This is a more private conversation that is

Page 7 of 11
engaged with between Christ and the Apostles present. The question is, as Mark intimates, raised
by “Peter and James and John and Andrew”, who “asked him privately”.

I think to help us see what the genuine focus is here, we need to place the emphasis of the questions
on a different subject. If we do that, we’ll not only better understand where the discussion is going
… we will be able to square up the three separate passages. Let me explain. Matthew’s language
seems to be distinguishing the discussion into three components. First, let’s discuss when this whole
“destruction of the temple” thing is going to happen, then tell us when you’re “coming” and then
tell us when the world is going to be ended. Under that analysis, the other two are only singling out
the first of the three questions “when shall these things be?” This disconnect is only present if we
are focusing on the idea that “these things” references the destruction of the temple. As if Christ
said “the temple is going to be destroyed” and they responded, “tell us when that’s happening? And
while you’re at it, tell us what sign we’ll see that it’s about to happen?” But I suggest to you that
the questions are not focused on the destruction of the temple, or anything about that.

First of all, if Christ was answering that question – when the temple is going to be destroyed – every
thing he says following that question has to then come into the framework of answering that
question. That is, none of the things Christ said are about the second advent of Christ … only about
when He’s going to come and destroy the temple and end the Jewish economy of things (the end of
the world as they know it). It’s a dastardly approach to reading the words of an eternal God, and it
is a happy work to help you avoid doing so.

Instead, consider the exchange as continuing to be focused on what the Jews were focused on at
the outset of the discussion – Christ’s earthly reign. Think of it flowing like this:

Disciples: “You’ve told the Jews in the temple that they’re so corrupted, they will not see you again
until they’ve owned you as their Messiah. Are you going to now set up your kingdom, centering it
in those beautiful buildings of the temple?”

Christ: “No. Those buildings are not going to be where I set up my temple and my reign. Those
buildings will be utterly destroyed so that structure will not even be remembered.”

Apostles: “Then, when are you going to establish your kingdom? When are you going to come
forward to do so? Since we know that will be the concluding of this world’s affairs, when will that
happen and how will the saints know you’re coming?”

Now you have a framing of the matter that matches the questions and properly opens the discussion
to a full and glorious display of Christ as the King who comes once to suffer and die for His saints
(His “suffering”) and comes again to claim those saints and be established in His earthly throne to
rule for a thousand years (“the glory that should follow) (1 Peter 1:11) and then “deliver[] the
kingdom to God, even the father” (1 Corinthians 15:24). Now we can avoid getting wrapped around
Page 8 of 11
a question that doesn’t even get answered – “when will Herod’s temple be destroyed?” Now we
can settle into a discussion of how Christ informed His Day and learn what we should be looking for
– since we’re no longer grinding over petty events inside a single period of time that we know from
history was merely 40 years. Now we can proceed to understand the eschatological words that
follow.

***************

As we begin the responsive sermon from Christ, the opening words shift voice. For the rest of the
dialog, the engagement described is between the elect and the non-elect … those with saving faith
and those without. Those with faith will be tested from within, to purge those who are false
professors. Those with faith will be tested from without to purge those whose faith is feigned and
therefore insubstantial. It is the description of warfare on a world stage; hence the question asking
of “the end of the world”. That warfare will go from a generations long … centuries long …
maturation of the church militant to a crucible generation when the terrorizing state will bring pity
for one who is with child or gives suck to a newborn. The warnings are for those who must maintain
faith through their whole lives, and for those who will be blessed to see the coming of Christ in
person. Christ is talking to all His saints in all of those generations and circumstances. It is our duty
to discern when the generational warnings transition to the signs of His return so we will rightly
divide this profound Word of truth coming from the mouth of the Messiah.

***************

“And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall
come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.” (Matthew 24:4-5)

&

“And Jesus answering them began to say, Take heed lest any man deceive you: For many shall
come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.” (Mark 13:5-6)

&

“And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am
Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.” (Luke 21:8)

From the beginning of the human race in Eden, the deceiver has been at work. He’s the father of
lies who “from the beginning [] abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.” (John
8:44). So the warning “be not deceived” may strike you as a pedestrian instruction, if it were not in
the opening words of Christ on the subject of eschatology. Here we have the Messiah prophesying
the way of the world for centuries to follow Him. This is a unique expression of satanic deceit – for
Page 9 of 11
it is all and only about Christianity. The lies here referenced are lies about Christian doctrine – not
the more obvious deceits among the pagan religions of the world. This is describing what we in this
generation can look backward on and testify to the absolute and amazing truth of it!

On the day that the New Testament Church was born, the brazen deceit and stripes and offshoots
and variations of offshoots began. They were yet in their embryonic state, but they grew and
flowered the world over. Call the roll, and the whole lot of them will look you in the face … and
point to some humanistic depiction of the Holy Messiah that is declaring “I am Christ”. Be not
deceived.

And this is not the only passage where this phenomenon is discussed in relation to the Revelation
of Jesus Christ. The whole of chapters two and three in the Revelation are about the treachery of
false Christianity possessing – more and less – the churches through the relevant history over the
past two millennia. Consider the ways in which false Christian doctrines have been propagated in
the very body of the Bride of Christ. The church of Ephesus is commended because they have “tried
them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars” (Revelation 2:2), which
is nothing more than the introduction of a false doctrine pretending to be Christ. The church of
Smyrna wrestles with “the synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 2:9). The church of Pergamos was in
danger of both the “doctrine of Balaam [and] the doctrine of the Nicolaitans” (Revelation 2:14-
15). Thyatira had in their midst “that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess”
(Revelation 2:20) tearing at her and draining her spiritual life blood. While the church in Sardis has
no name for what doctrinal horrors infect her, it is evident that her members are in danger of losing
the candlestick because Christ has “not found [her] works perfect before God.” (Revelation 3:2)
Philadelphia is given praise for her members’ love for each other and that they have prepared
themselves to have those restored Jews “worship before [their] feet, and to know that [Christ has]
loved the[m].” (Revelation 3:9). Finally, the lukewarm religiosity of the church of the Laodiceans
has caused them to follow after false Christs, making her members in desperate need of tried gold,
white raiment, and eye salve to restore her faith.

Though I have a urgent sense that we are coming to the close of this articulated period of Christian
history, at present we stand in the place of all those spiritual brethren. Our church is in need to be
purged of all those spiritual and physical indecencies articulated in those churches, so that we will
not be deceived and chase after a false Christ. The warning in this portion of Christ’s sermon is to
those generations of Christians through the centuries who were required to watch and wait while
they lived, and when their change came were put within that rank of souls in white robes awaiting
– staged for, if you will – the Day of the Lord. In Christ’s words, that day then ends, and another
much more sinister period opens.

I want to end this part of the discussion with drawing a sharp distinction between this passage and
one we will see later within Christ’s sermon. He describes a time in this trajectory from His first
advent to His second advent when men will say “Lo, here is Christ” (Matthew 24:23; Mark 13:21).
Page 10 of 11
That is a more specific behavior that is engaged in when the earth is on the cusp of Christ’s return.
That is a specific deceit, creating the danger that we presently live in where myriads chatter about
Christ’s return – when, where, how, for whom. We will discuss that in more depth when we’ve
travelled through this sermon to that point.

We will next examine the state of things in the final accumulation of generations in preparation for
the intense and terrifying days that sprint to Christ’s “coming, and the end of the world.” I hope I
have helped to set this structural stage so that we have a better lens to begin the work of searching
Christ’s own words about His coming. As always, I invite engagement and when I have light, I will
share it with any who wish to have it. I love you all. Amen.

Page 11 of 11