Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - Luke 21:5 - 21:36
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
First Part (Luk_21:5-24)
(Parallel to Mat_24:1-21; Mar_13:1-19.)
What now shall our Lord do in order to speak to them according to their receptivity and their need? Shall He say to them that the one fact shall be separated from the other by an interval of so many centuries? Then He would have had to give entirely up His own principle, Joh_16:12. With deep wisdom He places Himself, therefore, upon the position of the inquirers, and starts, it is true, from the destruction of Jerusalem, but in order at the same time to attach to this a delineation of the óõíôÝëåéá ôïῦ áἰῶïò . However, we must from our point of view hold the different attempts to indicate a definite point in this discourse, when our Lord leaves the first object and afterwards speaks exclusively of the second, as rather doubtful. It has, for instance, been believed that we find such in Mat_24:29, but Luk_21:34, impartially explained, gives us plainly to see that even after this He yet speaks of events which the generation then living should behold. If we, therefore, will not assume that our Lord Himself erred in so important a case, or that the Evangelists have not at all understood His eschatological discourse, or have inaccurately reported it—assumptions which, from a believing point of view, the Christian consciousness condemns in the strongest manner,—there then is nothing left for us but to assume that our Lord speaks indeed of the destruction of Jerusalem, but all this regarded as a type of the last judgment of the world. In other words, that He speaks prophetically of the earlier as a type of the later. Jerusalem’s destruction, but apprehended in its ideal significance, is and remains, therefore, the theme of the discourse, yet so that He from this point of view at the same time beholds and prophesies the destruction of the earthly economy in general that follows afterwards. Here also the peculiarity of prophetic vision is to be borne in mind, in which the conception of time recedes before that of space, and what is successive appears as coördinate. “Prophetia est ut pictura regionis cujusdam, quœ in proximo tecta et colles et pontes notat distincte, procul valles et montes latissime patentes in angustum cogit: sic enim debet etiam esse eorum, qui prophetiam legunt, prospectus in futurum, cui se prophetia accommodat.” Bengel. Both events flow in His representation so together, that the interval almost wholly recedes, and the tokens of His coming, which already begin to reveal themselves before the destruction of the City and of the Temple, are repeated in ever-increasing measure, the nearer the last judgment draws on. Therefore the interpreter must content himself if he is able to point out that all the here-threatened tribulations have already had a beginning of fulfilment in the period which immediately preceded the destruction of Jerusalem,—a beginning which then again bears the germ of subsequent fulfilments in itself, even as the fruit lies hidden in the bud.
On this interpretation, therefore, the eschatological discourse contains the exact answer to the question of the disciples, and it is from this sufficiently explained why in the apostolic epistles the expectation of a speedy return of our Lord arose, so that, for instance, Paul could entertain the thought of a possibility of himself even living to see it (1Th_4:15; 2Co_5:4, and elsewhere). They saw the signs foretokening the destruction of Jerusalem come nearer and nearer, and had not yet learned from the Lord that even after this event the present economy should endure, yea, for centuries. The attentive reader will, however, not overlook the intimations which are plainly given here and there in this discourse, that the coming of the Lord should, nevertheless, not take place so soon as many believed, and that with Jerusalem’s destruction the last word of the world’s history would not by any means be yet uttered (comp. Mat_24:48; Mat_25:5; Mat_25:19; Luk_21:24). As concerns, finally, the relation of the different Synoptics to one another, in reference to the setting forth of this discourse of Jesus, we cannot agree with the expositors who think that the praise of greater originality or exactness belongs to Mark or Luke. Unquestionably, in this respect, Matthew deserves the preference, while we, on the other hand, meet, especially in Luke, with a freer, more fragmentary redaction of the whole discourse. Many utterances of special importance are preserved more complete by Matthew and Mark; on the other hand, we meet in Luke with particular singularia, which in and of themselves deserve the highest attention, and assist the view over the great whole of this discourse in many relations. For the locality of the discourse, Matthew and Mark must be compared. An admirable picture by Begas seizes the moment when our Lord is sitting with His four friends at evening-time upon the Mount of Olives, and is disclosing to them the secrets of the future.
Luk_21:5. And as some spake of the temple.—Manifestly these words were not uttered after but during the leaving of the temple. It is as though the disciples, most deeply moved by the farewell to the temple (Mat_23:37-39), now seek to become the intercessors for the heavily-doomed sanctuary. They show Him the building (Matthew), which yet, far from being completed, appears to promise to the sanctuary a longer duration; the masses of stone (Mark), which may yet defy many centuries; the votive offerings with which (Luke) munificence and ostentation had adorned the house of the Lord. These ἀíáèÞìáôá had been for the greatest part offered by heathens; for instance, the holy vessels by the Emperor Augustus, other vessels again by the Egyptian Philadelphus, especially the magnificent golden vine which Herod the Great had presented, as Josephus relates, De Bell. Jud. vi. 5, 2, A. J. xv. 11, 8. If we now consider that according to the prophetic declarations, for instance, Psalms 72; Isaiah 60, the heathen also should bring their gifts and offerings to Zion, it is then doubly intelligible that the Apostles found in these very objects one ground the more for their hope of the continuance of the sanctuary.
Luk_21:6. As for these things which ye behold.—Nominative absolute, to indicate the subject, which now in our Saviour’s discourse is to be made sufficiently plain. By this very construction the antithesis becomes the stronger, which prevails between the light in which that which is seen there yet displays itself, and the fate that impended over it. “It is very remarkable that the Hellenic Gospel, which, according to the words of Christ, has especially kept in mind the relation between beauty of manifestation in its truth and beauty of manifestation in empty guise, has attached His prophecies of the destruction of Jerusalem and of the judgment of the world, immediately to an allusion to the beauty and rich splendor of the temple.”
There shall not be left one stone upon another.—Comp. Luk_19:43-44. In order rightly to comprehend the full force of the antithesis, we must represent to ourselves the whole magnificence of the sanctuary, over which later Jewish scholars exclaimed with wonder, “He that has not seen the temple of Herod has never beheld anything glorious.” See the notes on the parallels in Matthew and Mark.
Luk_21:7. When … and what sign.—Their question is, therefore, a double one; they wish to know precisely the point of time, and to recognize the tokens of this approaching catastrophe. Our Lord answers only the last question, while He in reference to the first gives to them only general intimations (comp. Mat_24:34-36). The signs which He gives are at the same time of such a nature that they, in fact, are only to be seen precursorily at the destruction of Jerusalem, but will appear decisively and in their full force only at the end of the world. It is here as with the boxes containing one within the other [Chinese boxes].
Luk_21:8. Take heed.—In Luke, as in Matthew and Mark, the warning against being seduced by false Messiahs stands first. It is not to be denied that before the destruction of Jerusalem, so far as we know, no deceivers appeared to play a strictly Messianic part; Bar Cochba, the first of these more than sixty deceivers, did not come up till afterwards. See Eusebius, H. E., iv. 6. But, certainly, there already lay in the misleading influence of a Jonathan, Theudas, Dositheus, Simon, Menander, and others, the germs of the same delusion which afterwards appeared more decidedly in the form of a false Messiahship. Bear in mind how the Goëtæ, by promises of miracles, allured many thousands into the wilderness, and thereby into destruction. Comp. Act_5:36-37; Act_21:38; Homily 76 of Chrysostom on Matthew. Thus did the general signs of the world’s end begin really to go into fulfilment with the destruction of Jerusalem.
Luk_21:10. Then said He unto them.—According to the representation of Luke the warning against misleaders was only something preliminary, an introduction, as it were, after which our Lord goes on to handle the question proposed, particularly and regularly.
Nation shall rise against nation.—The insurrections, earthquakes, famines, and other plagues, which are here adduced, were before the destruction of Jerusalem by no means so insignificant as, for instance, De Wette asserts. Bear in mind the massacres at Cæsarea, between Syrians and Jews, in which 20,000 of the latter fell, while in Syria almost every city was divided into two armies, which stood opposed to one another as deadly enemies; the quick succession of the five emperors in Rome within a few years, Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, and the tumults connected therewith in wider and narrower circles; the famine under Claudius, Act_11:30; the earthquakes at the time of Nero in Campania and Asia, in which whole cities perished; the singular and terrifying signs in Judæa of which Josephus and Tacitus speak, and we have historical cases enough for the explanation of this mysterious declaration of our Lord. Yet, above all, we should lay the emphasis on His declaration in Matthew and Mark, that all these things are only ἀñ÷áὶ ὠäßíùí , so that we have by no means to understand exclusively the wars, &c., which were to take place in the interval of forty years; but all the calamities of this Kind which in continually increasing measure should precede the end of the world, of which the destruction of Jerusalem was only the type. In another form the same thought is still more intimated than expressed in that which immediately follows, Luk_21:12.
Luk_21:12. But before all these.—The assertion of Meyer, ad loc., that this statement of time is, perhaps, a later modification of the tradition, ex eventu, rests upon the dogmatic preconception that our Lord could not have predicted to His disciples that their personal persecution should precede these last calamities. But the farther the last words of Luk_21:11 extend beyond the great catastrophe of Jerusalem’s destruction, so much the more natural is it also that our Lord points His disciples to that which awaits them even before.—Shall lay their hands on you, ἐðéâÜëëåéí .—Of course, with a hostile intent. A noticeable climax is found in the here-indicated persecutions. The lightest form is in a certain sense the delivery over to the synagogues, namely, in order to be there scourged, comp. Mat_10:17. A severe conflict impends over them when they are brought before kings and governors to give a testimony to the faith, comp. Mat_10:18. The worst awaits them when they (Luk_21:16) shall be delivered up by their parents, relatives, and friends. However, they have in the midst of this distress a threefold consolation: 1. All this is done for the sake of the Lord’s name ( Ý ̓ íåêá ), comp. Act_5:41; Acts 2. it shall turn to them for a testimony; ἀðïâÞóåôáé , here, as in Php_1:19, the intimation of a salutary result; the persecutions mentioned shall serve as opportunity to the apostles to give a witness concerning their Lord, which here, as in Act_18:11, is represented as something great and glorious. Finally, they shall in such moments be least wanting in the sense of the nearness of their Lord.
Luk_21:14. Settle it therefore in your hearts.—See on Luk_12:11; Mat_10:19-20. A promise of so high significance might be fittingly repeated. What they, according to our Lord’s will, are to settle in their hearts is, as it were, an antidote to the care which should afterwards fill their hearts. “Id unum laborate, ne laboretis.” Bengel. The ground of the encouragement is the ἐãὼ äþóù of our Lord, that involuntarily reminds us of the Divine word which Moses received at his calling at the burning bush, Exo_4:12.—Mouth and wisdom.—Mouth, concrete expression for the words themselves which they were to utter; wisdom, the gift of delivering these words befittingly, according to time, place, and the like. Thus is everything needful promised them as well for the material as for the formal part of their defence, so that continued opposition should become extremely hard for their antagonists. It is, of course, understood that here it is not an absolute but a relative impossibility that is spoken of, and that, therefore, not only Act_6:10, but also Act_7:51; Act_13:8-10, and other passages, must be compared.
Luk_21:16. And ye shall he delivered up.—The notices of the Acts and of the Epistles are too brief to admit of the mention of special examples of the fulfilment of this prophecy. This declaration, moreover, is not addressed to the Apostles as such, but so far as they were the representatives of the first believers generally.—Some of you shall they put to death.—More definitely expressed than the general ἀðïêôåíïῦóéí ὑìᾶò in Matthew. Among the four auditors of our Lord was found James, who was to be the first martyr [among the Apostles.—C. C. S.], and Peter, upon whom the subsequent prophecy (Joh_21:18-19) was fulfilled. But these were to be only the first fruits of an incalculable harvest of martyrs, who in the course of the centuries should fall for the cause of the Saviour, and the Apocalypse gives us only a vague foreboding of what outbreaks of iniquity, even in this respect, are hidden in the bosom of the mysterious future.
Luk_21:17. Hated by all men.—In the apostolic epistles, e. g., Rom_8:35-37; 1Co_4:9-10; 2Co_11:23-29; Heb_10:32-34, we find a rich array of proofs for the exact fulfilment of this word, even in the first period of the church. Bear in mind also the dangers which the flight of the first Christians to the Trans-Jordanic Pella gave occasion to, and, above all, do not overlook how this hatred also in its different phases becomes more and more intense the more rapidly the history and development of God’s kingdom hastens to its end.
Luk_21:18. But there shall not a hair.—Comp. Luk_12:7; Mat_10:30. Of course no assurance that they should in no case be slain, but only that they should be inviolable upon earth so long as they were necessary for the service of the Lord, as also that even their death should redound åἰò óùôçñßáí and to the glory of Christ; Php_1:19. And with this promise of absolute security in a negative respect, they are at the same time also assured of their absolute security on the positive side: By your endurance, &c.
Luk_21:19. Gain your souls. ÊôÞóåóèå .—Although the êôÞóáóèå of the Recepta is strongly supported by external authority, yet the internal arguments in favor of the reading of A., B. [not Cod. Sin.] are in our eyes of prevailing weight. “The Recepta is an interpretamentum of the future understood imperatively.” Meyer. We have here, therefore, the obverse of the promise, Luk_21:18; so far from a hair of their head being hurt (comp. Act_27:34), they should on the other hand, by their perseverance in the midst of all these persecutions, preserve their souls, their life. By ὑðïìïíÞ we are not to understand patience, but, as in Rom_5:4; Jam_1:3-4, endurance; and to explain êôᾶóèáé not (De Wette) in the sense of åὑñßóêåéí , Mat_16:25; but rather in that of “maintain, preserve.” (1Th_4:4.) It is moreover of course understood, that we are by the preservation of the soul not to understand the natural life in itself, but the true life, whose loss or maintenance is for the disciple of the Saviour the greatest question of life. [It is difficult to indicate in English the double meaning of øõ÷Þ , which denotes both soul and life.—C. C. S.] By endurance they were to preserve this true life, even if they for it should lose the life of the body. We find here therefore, in other words, the same promise which is given Mat_24:13; Rev_2:10, and elsewhere, while, on the other hand, the admonition which, according to the common explanation, is found in this verse: Maintain the soul in patience (comp. Heb_10:36), rests upon an incorrect reading, and without doubt would have had to be otherwise expressed.
Luk_21:20. And when ye shall see Jerusalem.—Comp. Lange on Mat_24:15. The mention of the armies stands in Luke in the place of the abomination of desolation mentioned by Matthew and Mark, and the prophecy of Daniel, which is very especially important for the Jewish Christians of Matthew, Luke leaves out in his representation. The very uncertainty of so many expositors in reference to the proper signification of the âäÝëõãìì ôῆò ἐñçìþóåùò , is a proof the more how much has been done for the desecration of the holy ground, so that we scarcely know any longer what we have principally to understand. According to the redaction of Luke, even the appearance of the hostile hosts before Jerusalem is an ominous sign, and the disciples are to know that even with the most valiant defence, there is no deliverance any longer to be hoped for.
Luk_21:21. Then let them which are in Judæa.—Commendation of a hasty flight as the only means of deliverance. In Judæa one finds himself in the heart of the population, and therefore he must seek to reach the lonesome mountains; at any cost he must leave the city, and if he is happy enough to get out of it at the right time he shall under no pretext return.— Ἐí ôáῖò ÷ῶñáéò , not in regionibus (Bretschneider, De Wette), but in agris, where the principal Jews often inhabited country houses. For more particular directions as to their flight, see Matthew.
Luk_21:22. Days of vengeance.—That is, not days in which the one people takes vengeance on the disobedience and refractoriness of the other people, but in which God the Lord accomplishes His judgments upon His enemies. Here the declaration of Moses (Psa_90:11), finds its application.—May be fulfilled.—According to the express declaration of our Lord, therefore, the fall of the city and the temple also is already prophesied in the Old Testament. We may call to mind Deuteronomy 28, which in a certain sense may be named the ground-theme which was afterwards further carried out in the prophetical Scriptures. Daniel also may be included, yet he is by no means especially and exclusively meant. Instead of a citation of the prophetic word, we find in Luke only a general statement, which however evidently shows that this whole prophesying of our Lord is nothing else than the prolongation and continuance of the line which had been drawn centuries before. It is moreover noticeable how recognizably the stamp of Divine retribution was impressed upon the fate of Jerusalem and the temple, even for heathen eyes. We may call to mind the expression even of a Titus: “That God was so angry with this people that even he feared His wrath if he should suffer grace to be shown to the Jews,” and how he refused every mark of honor on account of the victory obtained, with the attestation that he had been only an instrument in God’s hands to punish this stiff-necked nation. Comp. the well-known expressions of Josephus, as to the height which the wickedness of his contemporaries had reached.
Luk_21:23. Woe unto them that are with child.—An ïὐáß not of imprecation, but of bitter lament, in which the compassion and sympathy of the Saviour expresses itself. [Equivalent to: Alas, for them!—C. C. S.] Comp. Luk_23:29. Such women would be less fitted for rapid flight, without, however, on account of their condition finding compassion. The ground of this fact is a double one: great distress upon earth (entirely general), and especially great wrath upon this people. Thus nowhere does a refuge present itself, neither in nor out of Judæa. Comp. Isa_26:20; Rev_6:16-17.
Luk_21:24. And they shall fall.—A more particular setting forth of the fate of the Jews, which the result confirmed most terrifically. According to Josephus, the number of the slain amounted to 1,100,000; 97,000 were dragged as prisoners mostly to Egypt and the provinces. Comp. Deu_28:64.— Ἔóôáé ðáôïõìÝíç , Jerusalem shall be a city trodden down by the heathen; not alone an intimation of her desecration by a heathen garrison (De Wette), but a designation of all the scornful outrages to which the capital should be given over. Comp. Lamentations 4. Nor is there any more reason here by the entirely general mention of Ý ̓ èíç to understand the Romans exclusively. On the other hand, we may here find the announcement of the interval of centuries in which the most different nations, in almost uninterrupted succession, have trodden down Jerusalem:—Titus, Hadrian, Chosroes, the Mussulmen, the Crusaders, and the later dominion of Islam,—an interval that yet endures, and whose end shall be appointed only when the times of the Gentiles shall be fulfilled.
The times of the Gentiles, êáéñïὶ ἐèíῶí .—Not the times of the calling of the Gentiles (Stier), by which an entirely foreign thought would be interpolated; but the times which are predestined to the Gentiles for the fulfilment of these Divine judgments. That by êáéñïß a long interval is intimated (Dorner), appears, it is true, not from this plural in itself, but from the whole connection, according to which these êáéñïß shall endure even to the final term, and (comp. Mat_24:29) shall finally be cut short by the last act of the drama of the history of the world. Remarkable is this expression in the first place, because an evident intimation lies hidden therein, that, after the fall of Jerusalem, there is yet a period of indefinite duration to be awaited; and secondly, because a thought of the restoration of Jerusalem gleams through, which is elsewhere expressed even more plainly.
2. It is by no means arbitrary that our Lord joins the destruction of the temple and the end of the world so intimately together. For on the one hand it is historically proved that the fall of the Jewish state was the indispensably necessary condition to free the youthful Christendom from the limits of a confined nationality, to elevate it into the religion of the world, and therefore mightily to prepare the revelation of the glory of the Lord, and the triumph of His kingdom over the heathen world. On the other hand, Jerusalem and the temple, even in the prophetic Scriptures of the Old Testament, bear a typical and symbolical character. Zion stands there not alone as the local seat, but also as the visible image of the whole theocracy in its settled strength and beauty, and the whole Christianized world may in a certain sense be called a new spiritual Jerusalem Is it, therefore, a wonder if the judgment upon Jerusalem serves at the same time as a mirror for the last judgment of the world? The destruction of the city and the temple was the first of those great world-events which forwarded the brilliant, triumphant, continually more powerful coming of the Lord. Herewith the series of events is opened which in the course of centuries was destined to coöperate powerfully for the coming of God’s kingdom on earth. Ever more glorious does Christ appear on the ruins of annihilated temples and thrones; in continually greater measure do the here-indicated tokens of His coming appear; misleadings, persecutions, insurrections, &c. Finally, the kingdom of light celebrates its highest triumph, after the might of darkness has immediately before concentrated its highest energy, and the destruction of the whole earthly economy is only the continuance and completion of the fall of the original seat of the Israelitish Theocracy. Whoever shall hereafter at the end of the world look back as the Lord here looked forward, he will discover that the long course of time between the destruction of the Temple and the destruction of the World, was nothing else than a great interval of continually richer manifestations of grace, and of continually severer judgments.
3. “Die Weltgeschichte, das Weltgericht.” “The history of the world is the world’s judgment.” Schiller. The eschatological discourse of our Lord is especially adapted to bring into view as well the relative truth as also the superficial one-sidedness of this famous word of the poet. That facts like the fall of Jerusalem are Divine judgments, and that, therefore, the history of the world may be called the striking revelation of an inexorable Nemesis, our Lord said centuries ago. But that all these Divine judgments are only preliminary, only typical, only prophecies of that which hereafter shall take place before the eyes of heaven and earth at the expiration of the earthly economy, must be just as little forgotten. The Johannean idea of êñßóéò finds its complement precisely in the Synoptical delineation of the ἐó÷Üôç ἡìÝñá , and it remains therefore true, that the poet’s utterance of the world-judgment of history must be complemented in this manner: that it is not yet for that the final judgment.
4. The fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Jews stands forth here not only as a destiny tragical beyond compare, but as a Divine judgment, whose ultimate cause can be obscure to no believing Christian, The present condition of Israel is the grand argument for the authority of the Prophet who, proclaimed all this eighteen centuries ago and whom they therefore unthankfully rejected. For that very reason we clearly see the decided unchristianness of such an emancipation of the Jews as is wont to be urged in our days, under the motto of freedom and culture. The right of hospitality for the banished ones of Judah cannot be ardently enough enjoined, nor too large-heartedly practiced; but it becomes an actual injustice when Christians suffer themselves to be by these very Jews, only temporarily abiding among them, in any way hindered in the enjoyment of their Christian privileges and in the practice of their Christian duties. But this modern denial of Christ, therefore, avenges itself not less than the Jewish rejection of the Messiah; when Christians bring the Jews their Christ as a sacrifice, the Jews begin with material and moral power to control the Christian state, and liberalism, which is especially upheld, moreover, by Jewish Deistic influence, prepares the way for indifferentism, which finally—of course always under the excellent motto of enlightenment and right—leads to Atheism. Here also holds good our Saviour’s word: âëÝðåôå , ìëáíèῆôå .
[Without pretending to concur unqualifiedly in all these remarks of our author, which in part rest upon Millenarian views that I do not share, it appears to me that there is great force, nevertheless, in his words: “When Christians bring the Jews their Christ as a sacrifice, the Jews begin with material and moral power to control the Christian state.” Take, as an instance, the assumption of the Jews—an insignificant fraction of our population—to dictate the forms of the fast and thanksgiving proclamations issued by our civil authorities, and to insist on every distinctively Christian feature—except the date—being expunged from them. How long will the Christians of our country tolerate this studious omission of the name of Christ in documents inviting the people to a worship which, for nine-tenths of them, can only be a Christian worship?—C. C. S.]
Starke:—Hedinger:—Great sin, great judgments.—Look not so much at the visible and perishable, as at the invisible and eternal.—Nova Bibl. Tub.:—To put Christ’s name forward, to come in Christ’s name, to be called Christian, is not all. All this deceivers also can do.—Convulsions in church and state, but especially persecution of the truth, is an omen of destruction.—One ungodly man must ever punish another; how holy, righteous, and terrible are God’s judgments.—It is, in truth, something terrible that when the judgments of God break in, men do not become better, but much worse.—If the righteous man has a righteous cause he need fear nothing.—Osiander:—Although in persecutions many a confessor of Jesus has left his life behind, yet the Gospel cannot be blotted out.—Cramer:—Let no one be surprised that he must suffer innocently.—Brentius:—A patient spirit is better than a lofty spirit.—Woe to the land, the people, the city, from which God hath departed,—there is nothing more left than: haste to deliver thy soul, Gen_19:22.—Luther:—Upon the days of grace follow the days of vengeance.—The married state also sometimes a state of woe.—Bibl. Wirt.:—So often as we behold the dispersed Jews, we should be terrified at God’s wrath, sigh over them and pray; Rom_11:20.
Heubner:—God solemnly proclaimed the abrogation of the Mosaic institute when He destroyed the temple.—Let not the true Christ betaken from thee; there is only one.—God decrees gradually heavier and heavier trials; yet the time of suffering is defined by Him.—Perseverance and faith under all afflictions is the condition of the deliverance of the soul.—There is a holy vengeance of God, and Jerusalem’s fall is a manifest monument of His retributive righteousness.—Arndt:—The future of Jerusalem and the world,—the inquiry as to the future: 1. When is it permitted us? 2. How is it answered by the Lord? 3. Whereto should the answer serve us?—Vinet:—Etudes évangéliques, p. 265. Les pierres du temple.—Schleiermacher:—Sermon, Jan. 24, 1808, upon Mat_24:1-2. The right honoring of native greatness of an earlier time.—J. J. L. ten Kate:—The Wandering Jew:—1. An unexampled wonder in the annals of the world; 2. a living testimony of the truth of Christianity; 3. a future revelation of the glory of God; 4. a legitimate creditor of every believer.
Footnotes:
Luk_21:8.—The ïõí of the Recepta should be expunged, as by Lachmann and Tischendorf, [Meyer, Tregelles, Alford.]
Luk_21:11.—According to the arrangement of Tischendorf, [Tregelles, Alford]: óåéóìïß ôå ìåãÜëïé êáὶ êáôὰ ôüðïõò ëïéìïß , ê . ô . ë .
[Luk_21:15.—Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, Van Oosterzee put ἀíôéóôῆíáé before ἀíôåéðåῖí .—C. C. S.]
Luk_21:19.—With Griesbach, Rinck, Lachmann, Tischendorf, [Meyer, Tregelles, Alford,] we give to the reading of A., B., &c., the preference. See Exegetical and Critical remarks. [Cod. Sin. here agrees with the Recepta.—C. C. S.]